* As Supreme court set to hear argument on Tuesday in the bitter patent dispute.
As argument of both parties continues, after five years legal proceedings, the U.S Supreme Court is set to hear both parties argument on Tuesday in the bitter patent dispute between the world’s twoSMARTPHONE manufacturers over the amount Samsung is to pay to Apple for copying the iPhone’s design.
The judge’s is expected to end it ruling in June 2017, could have a long term impact for designers and product manufactures going forward because the Supreme Court, if agrees withSAMSUNG, will limit the penalties for swiping a patented design. According to the source: Samsung Electronics Co ltd paid Apple Inc. $ 548.2 million last December, fulfilling parts of its liability stemming from a 2012 verdict for infringing Apple’s patent and copying its look.
What then is the basic problem?
The world’s two best smartphone producers and seller’s went to court over designs has now become a normal and natural thing on the popular world of smartphones, with the court ruling in favor of apple in 20At issue were design features by now familiar to consumers: a black, rectangular, round corneredPHONE front, a surrounding rim, known as the bezel’ and a grid of 16 colorful icon. Those design elements were protected, prompting the jury to ward Apple all the profits from sales of smartphones containing those features, Samsung lawyers said in their filing.
Yet Samsung staged an argument before the Supreme Court that it should not have make a huge amount of money as $399 million of that payout for infringement of three patented designs on the iPhone’s rounded –corner front face. Its bezel and the colorful grid of icons that represent programs and applications. It is the first Supreme Court cases involving designs patents in more than 120 years when the product issues were carpets and drugs. According to the source: Cupertino, California- based Apple first sued its South Korean rival in 2011, stating that the Samsung stole its technology and the iPhone’s trademarked appearance.
Samsung who insists that it should not have had to take over all its profits on phones that infringed the patents, which contributed only marginally to a complex product with thousands of patented features. Apple believes that Samsung was properly penalized for ripping off its work. For many years of fighting behind these fience rivals, this case has become mostly about money and which seems placing one above the other.