Samsung: Apple engaging in 'outright abuse of patent law, not pursuit of innovation'
- — 28 August, 2012 16:14
Samsung has issued a memo to its staff, regarding the outcome of the Apple v Samsung trial in the US. The memo, which claims that Samsung will "continue to so our utmost until our arguments have been accepted", points to the differing rulings in other countries with respect to the same patent battle, and suggests that Apple's success is based on "the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation", can be read on Samsung's blog.
Samsung begins with the claim: "We initially proposed to negotiate with Apple instead of going to court, as they had been one of our most important customers. However, Apple pressed on with a lawsuit, and we have had little choice but to countersue, so that we can protect our company."
The memo refers to the "concern" among Samsung employees and customers caused by the verdict, noting that "the judge's final ruling remains, along with a number of other procedures," and claiming: "We will continue to do our utmost until our arguments have been accepted."
The memo highlights the fact that "The NDCA verdict starkly contrasts decisions made by courts in a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Korea, which have previously ruled that we did not copy Apple's designs. These courts also recognized our arguments concerning our standards patents."
It should be noted that while it is true that the simultaneous verdict of the Seoul jury found Apple guilty of copying some Samsung patents, Samsung was also found guilty there, so that verdict limits both Apple and Samsung - affecting sales of the Galaxy tablets and the iPad in South Korea.
The verdict by a UK judge that Apple can't claim that Samsung coipied the iPad because "it's not as cool as the iPad" is also due to go to appeal in the autumn. And in Germany, a judge has banned sales of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 in European Union.
The memo goes o to insinuate that Apple's "primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation," and concludes that: "We trust that the consumers and the market will side with those who prioritize innovation over litigation, and we will prove this beyond doubt".