A Seminar Report

on
APPLE VS SAMSUNG
(Controversy Case)

(Session: 2012-2015)


Submitted To: Submitted By:
Roop Kaur


Table of Contents

Sr. No. Title Page No.
1.
Introduction to Apple
Incorporation
1
2.
Introduction to Samsung
Electronics Co. Ltd.
2
3.
Apple vs Samsung Case
History
3
4. The Case Trials 7
5. 2012 9
6. 2013 14
7.

Conclusion

15
8. References 16





List of Tables
Sr. No. Title Page No.
1. List of Apple Devices 1


List of Figures
Sr. No. Title Page No.
1.
Samsung Smartphone and
Apple iPhone
6
2.
Old Galaxy Tab 10.1 and
Modified Galaxy Tab
10.2
7
3. Apple iPhones 9
4.
Samsungs media leaked
evidence
10
5.
Apples claim of
infringed icons by
Samsung
11
6.
Ironic Picture of Samsung
and Apple
12
7.
Apple iPad and Samsung
Galaxy Tab
13

Introduction to Apple Inc:
Apple Inc. is an American multinational corporation with its headquarters at Cupertino,
California. It designs, develops and sells consumer electronics, computer software and
personal computers. Apple was founded on April 1, 1976 by Steve Jobs, Steve Woznaik and
Ronald Wayne to sell Apple I personal computer kit; and was incorporated as Apple
Computer Inc. on January 3, 1979 without Wayne. Multi-millionaire Mike Markkula
financially supported Apple for its incorporation and provided a $250,000 initial funding. On
January 9, 2007 with the launch of iPhone, it shifted towards consumer electronics from
computer manufacturing, thus, the word Computer was removed from Apple Computer
Inc.
Table 1: List of Apple Products
Hardware Products Software Products
Mac (Computers/Laptops) OS X (Operating System)
iPod (Music Players) iOS Operating System (iPhone/iPod/iPad)
iPhone (Smartphones) iTunes (Media Browser)
iPad (Tablet Computer) Safari (Web Browser)
Apple TV iLife (Creativity Suite)
iWatch (in development) iWork (Production Suite)

Apple Inc. was named as the most admired company in the United States for the year 2008
and in the world from 2008-2012 by Fortune magazine and entered the top ten Fortune 500
list of companies in May 2013 to be at the sixth position from the previous eleventh position
(2012). It is the second largest information technology company (by revenue) in the world
after Samsung Electronics. Also, it follows Samsung Electronics and Nokia to be the third
largest mobile phone maker in the world. Apple Inc. is the largest publicly traded corporation
in the world by market capitalization with estimated US $ 415 billion as of March 2013.
Apples online iTunes Store is the largest music retailer in the world.
Due to labor practices of its contractors and its own environmental and business practices, the
company has been attracting criticism.

Introduction to Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd:
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. is a South Korean multinational electronics company. It is a
flagship subsidiary of the Samsung Group with its headquarters at Suwon, South Korea.
Earlier, Samsung manufactured lithium-ion batteries, chips, flash memory, hard drive and
semiconductors for Apple Inc., Sony, HTC and Nokia. Recently, Samsung Electronics
expanded and diversified into consumer markets increasing the portfolio of products and
revenue stream.
Since 2009, it has been the worlds largest information technology company (by revenue) and
the largest vendor in the mobile phones, smartphones due to popularity of Samsung Galaxy
line of devices. Since 2011, it has the largest mobile phone manufacturer in the world.
Samsung has been the largest maker of LCD panels since 2002 and largest television
manufacturer since 2006. The Brand Trust Report, an annual report published by the Trust
Research Advisory ranked Samsung as Indias second most trusted brand for the year 2013
rising up from the fourth position for the year 2012. Samsung is a major part of the Economy
of South Korea.
Some of the products of Samsung Electronics include:
LCD and LED Panels
Mobile Phones
Semiconductors
Televisions
Printers (Mono Laser, Color Laser)
Laptops
Cameras
Hard Disk Drives
Camcorders
Mp3 Music Players
Computer Tablets

Spread over 88 countries the company has a wide sales network and assembly plants.


Apple vs. Samsung Case History:
Before filing the petitions in April 2011, Steve Jobs initiated talks with Samsung in 2010 to
pursue negotiations with Samsung to avoid the infringement lawsuit. Apple repeatedly sent
Samsung presentations and electronic archive files containing charts illustrating Samsungs
infringement of Apple patents. But the failed negotiations led Apple to file lawsuits against
the South Korean company. Even Apples CEO Tim Cook told analysts that he has always
hated litigation and continues to hate it. Whereas, Samsung experts commented saying
iPhone and iPad designs are obvious and should not be protected.
Apple Sues Samsung:
Samsung was one of Apple's critical component suppliers, manufacturing DRAM and SSDs
for Mac Book Pros and the A4, A5 processors in the iPhone, iPod touch, Apple TV, and iPad.
In spite of the relationship, Apple Inc. blamed Samsung of copying Apples innovative
technology, distinct user interface, product and packaging designing instead of independent
product development; violating Apples valuable intellectual property rights. Apple
demanded Samsung to either stop infringing its IP or pay a royalty but Samsung refused.
Thus, on April 15, 2011 Apple Inc. filed a complaint against Samsung Electronics as a result
of failed negotiations. Apple asked the court to permanently forbid Samsung and its various
divisions and suppliers from ever infringing Apple's claimed IP again, triple damages for
patent infringement, any wrongful profits Samsung might have gained from using Apple's IP,
some punitive damages, money for corrective advertising, and the cost of Apple's attorney's
fees.
Some of the patent claims out of the initial 16 filed by Apple against Samsung include:
Packaging trade dress claims:
A rectangular box with minimal metallic silver lettering and a large front-view picture
of the product prominently on the top surface of the box
A two-piece box wherein the bottom piece is completely nested in the top piece; and
Use of a tray that cradles products to make them immediately visible upon opening
the box.
Overall design of the product, including the rectangular shape, the rounded corners,
the silver edges, the black face, and the display of sixteen colorful icons.
Configuration of a rectangular handheld mobile digital electronic device with rounded
corners, gray rectangular portion in the center with a black band above and below gray
rectangle, curved corners with a silver outer border and side.
Apple's registered trademarks on several iOS system icons, and TouchWiz includes six
icons that look almost exactly the same: iOS phone, messaging, photos, settings, notes,
contacts, iTunes app icons.
Graphical User Interface for a Display -the iOS home screen and the grid of icons.
The iPhone 3G / 3GS design, just the device's shell (any button or screen size differences on
Samsung's devices don't matter)
Method and apparatus for displaying and accessing control and status information in a
computer system, it covers a system that pops open a window to show multiple interactive
control widgets.
List scrolling and document translation, scaling and rotation on a touch-screen display one
of Apple's first iOS-related patents.
Method and apparatus for displaying information during an Instant Messaging Session it
covers arranging incoming messages in a communications session in a timeline that's
horizontally spaced.
Ellipse Fitting for Multi-Touch Surfaces, it covers taking touch impressions mapping them
to ellipses.
Application programming interfaces for scrolling operations and it covers deciding when a
user is using one finger to scroll a view versus two or more fingers to scale that same view.
Method and apparatus for displaying a window for a user interface, covers displaying an
overlay window over the standard UI in response to a keystroke and having it disappear
automatically after some predefined amount of time. In other words, it covers things like the
iOS volume display, which automatically fades out after you've adjusted the volume. This is
a relatively new patent, just granted on December 14,
Cantilevered push button having multiple contacts and fulcrums, it covers the volume
rocker on the iPhone 3G and 3GS a volume rocker that looks quite like the one on
Samsung's various Galaxy S devices.

Samsung counter sues Apple:
After Apple slammed Samsung with 16 infringement lawsuits on April 15, 2011; Samsung
filed lawsuits against Apple in Korea, Japan, and Germany alleging that it infringed a total of
10 patents. Samsung is a major international patent holder. Had Samsung pulled ahead in one
of these foreign countries, the pressure would have been on the US to give the final verdict on
case. Samsungs complaint in the Northern District of California claimed that:
First, Samsung spent $35 billion on R&D from 2005 to 2010, which contributed to a sizable
patent portfolio: 28,700 US patents, 4,551 of which were issued in 2010.
Method and Apparatus for Transmitting/Receiving Packet Data Using Pre-Defined Length
Indicator in a Mobile Communication System is very technical patent describing a system
to increase mobile network efficiency by using header data more effectively.
Apparatus and Method for Generating Scrambling Code in UMTS Mobile Communication
System, is another highly-technical UMTS / W-CMDA patent that covers generating unique
scrambling codes for downlink transmitters.
Method and Apparatus for Data Transmission in a Mobile Telecommunication System
Supporting Enhanced Uplink Service, covers using two radio channels to transmit data
using a set amount of power.
Interleaving Apparatus and Method for Symbol Mapping in an HSDPA Mobile
Communication System.
Apparatus and Method for Channel Coding and Multiplexing in CDMA Communication
System, covers taking multiple data frames that are received out of order across multiple
channels and putting them back together efficiently.
Apparatus and Method for Controlling a Demultiplexer and a Multiplexer Used for Rate
Matching in a Mobile Communication System, covers a transmitter that encodes an input
stream into three interleaved streams that are then broken up into different radio frames.
Turbo Encoding/Decoding Device and Method for Processing Frame Data According to
QOS, has what is clearly the best name of all the claimed patents.
Software Keyboard System Using Trace of Stylus on a Touch Screen and Method for
Recognizing Key Code Using the same, is the first UI patent, covering software keyboard
functionality.
Systems and Methods for Generating Visual Representations of Graphical Data and Digital
Document Processing, covers displaying a low-resolution image preview while the full-
resolution images loads in the background.
Mobile Telephone Capable of Displaying World Time and Method for Controlling the
Same, is a patent on calculating time in multiple cities based on a reference time signal sent
from a remote system and the local time of the device.

Figure 1: Samsung Smartphone and Apple iPhone

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/22/2892714/apple-samsung-negotiations-2010-
patent/in/2297513






The Case Trials:
April 2011-December 2011
The Apple and Samsung's intellectual property battle had spanned over 10 countries,
engulfing the two companies in more than 20 legal battles by October 2011. Following the
initial filing of the petitions by the software giants, a German district court issued a
preliminary injunction in the favor of Apple barring the sale of Galaxy Tab 10.1. The German
court banned the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in every EU nation except Netherlands for illegally
copying the iPad's trademarked design, but Samsung appealed the injunction giving hope to
the company of winning the German case in general, which was later turned down. Despite
the rejected appeal, Samsung redesigned its Galaxy Tab 10.1N's appearance to avoid its
disappearance in Germany, but, it could not save its Galaxy Tab 7.7 from going off the floors.
Though Samsung was forced to sell a modified Galaxy Tab 10.1N, it took the fight against
Apple further ahead by adding four extra complaints related to patented WCDMA standards,
at the German Court.
Figure 2: Old Galaxy Tab 10.1(above) and Modified Galaxy Tab 10.1N (below)

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/16/2566533/samsung-redesigns-galaxy-tab-10-1n-
avoid-german-sales-ban/in/2297513
Stepping in after Germany, a Dutch court banned sales of Samsung Galaxy S, Galaxy Ace
and Galaxy S II smartphones due to infringement of only Apple's patent of iOS photo apps in
Android 2.3 build discarding other patent and trademark claims of Apple. After the Dutch
ban, Samsung planned to patch up its photo app to avoid banning of sales. After Germany and
Netherlands, Australian Federal Court of Justice also granted another injunction to Apple
banning the local sale of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 due to infringement of three Apple iPad
patents related to touchscreens and gesture controls. Soon after the ban from the Australian
Court, Samsung appeared before the judge again for selling a modified version of the Galaxy
Tab 10.1 free of the disputed Apple patents and won the appeal to alter its design and revoked
the ban soon after. In order to generate publicity in Australia, Samsung added a tagline to the
tab; Galaxy Tab 10.1 - "The tablet Apple tried to stop". Beginning from April 2011 Apple and
Samsung were busy in courtrooms around the world besides developing new products. By the
end of 2011, the Apple - Samsung controversy was going through a mixed victory for both
the companies with Apple winning preliminary injunctions and forcing Samsung to introduce
modified versions of its products in the market but Samsung maintaining its stand to keep its
products in the market.












2012
With a new year on the roll, Apple had some new year resolutions against Samsung, when in
January 2012, the Cupertino incorporation filed a brand new patent infringement suit against
Samsung in Germany alleging Samsung's Galaxy S Plus, Galaxy S II and many other
Samsung smartphones violating Apple's European design rights. But on the other hand, the
New Year brought some bad news for the South Korean handset maker when the German
judges rejected Samsung's two out of the five patent lawsuits related to 3G/UMTS wireless
communication standards against Apple, with unclear reasoning. Meanwhile, in February
2012 in Australia Apple hit out at Samsung with 278 claims covering 22 patent infringements
across 10 devices. A month after Apple's additional claims against Samsung in Australia,
Samsung got another blow when a Netherlands' Hague District Court rejected banning of
Apple iPhones or iPads in Netherlands. The court ruled that Samsung could not collect a
license on 3G patents for iPhone 4S and other Apple devices using Qualcomm chips. Since,
Apple had used baseband chips from Infineon and Intel for iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4 and iPad 1, 2
and it was not clear whether Infineon and Intel had provided Samsung with relevant licensing
fees for the baseband chips.
Figure 3: Apple iPhones

Source: http://sparkletechnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/all-apple-iphones.jpg
Apple was given time till April 2012 to present evidence about the Infineon and Intel
baseband chips. However, in June 2012 Samsung heaved a sigh of relief as the Hague District
Court ruled in its favor that Apple was found to violate one of Samsung's patent on iPhone
3G, 3GS, 4 and iPad 1,2 using the baseband chips from Infineon and Intel. Samsung was not
entitled to ban Apple devices as the infringement was classified as FRAND (fair, reasonable
and non-discriminatory terms). Adding up the preliminary injunction wins of Apple, US
District Judge tentatively stopped sales of Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the US. Apple had
agreed to post a $2.6 million bond in case Samsung proved Apple's D'889 design patent
invalid to compensate Samsung's loss but US District Judge banned the Galaxy Tab 10.1
following which Samsung appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit. In July 2012, Germany extended the ban of Galaxy Tab 7.7 to the entire EU from the
earlier ban which was limited to only Germany but cleared way for Galaxy Tab 10.1N. In the
end of July 2012, Samsung was sanctioned by a California federal judge for destroying e-mail
evidence that Apple could have used in the court. During that time, Samsung's company e-
mails were destroyed after two weeks (unless employees saved them) and Samsung claimed
to have ordered employees to save relevant e-mails but the automatic deletion was carried on.
In the days which followed, Samsung created troubles for itself by revealing in the media an
evidence rejected by the court during the trial. The evidence was about Samsung's F700
phone which was in development months before the January 2007 iPhone introduction and
internal company emails showing that Apple wanted to pursue a "Sony-style" design for its
phone. It was denied because the judge ruled that it was produced too late. Following the
instance US judge again warned Samsung of sanctioning the South Korean phone maker.
Figure 4: Samsungs Media Leaked Evidence

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/31/3209204/samsung-angers-judge-by-sending-
media-rejected-evidence-in-apple-trial/in/2297513
In August 2012, the Apple-Samsung legal saga turned to icons and iPads, with Samsung
objecting Apple of tampering with Epic Touch 4G (Apple-Samsung joint venture) to make its
icon layout more like iPhone but the judge overruled the objection, giving Apple a go ahead
to carry on its evaluation of the iPhones and Samsung smartphones similar icons. Whereas,
Samsung accused Apple of infringing three different functions : sending a text-only email,
sending an email with photo attachment and going through different photos in a gallery mode
in iPhone4,3G,3GS and iPad 2, iPod 4G. On the other hand, Apple accused Samsung of
patent covering ability of music play in the background on mobile device performing other
functions.

Figure 5: Apples claim against infringed icons by Samsung

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/7/3227226/apple-samsung-trial-evidence-august-7-
2012

On August 24, 2012 Apple saw an enormous mid-victory in the Californian Court when nine
jurors decided unanimously in its favor that Samsung infringed Apples intellectual property
limiting the damage to not more than 2.5 billion. According to the jurors, there was not even
a single violation by Apple related to utility patents (photo interface and emails). Also, the
jury smashed Samsungs allegations of Apple infringing 3G patents in iPhone 3G, 3GS and
iPad 1, 2 because Intel already had a licensing agreement with Samsung. Starting from
infringing Apples bounce-back patent to utility patents to the design patents; the jurors found
that majority of the devices were infringed. Whereas, not even a single Apple patent was
declared invalid but the trade dress for iPads icons and layout could not protected because
they were unregistered. The jury slammed Samsung with a $1.049 billion figure for the
damages to Apple.

Figure 6: Ironic picture of Samsung and Apple

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/26/3187783/judge-sanctions-samsung-
apple-patent-trial-evidence/in/2297513

A week after $1.049 billion victory against Samsung, Apple added to Samsungs trouble by
adding more devices to the infringement lawsuits. The revised list of infringed devices now
included Galaxy S III, Galaxy Note, Galaxy S II, Galaxy Nexus, Illusion, Stratosphere,
Galaxy Note 10.1, Galaxy Tab 8.9 and others. Samsung added iPhone 5 to its list of Apple
devices infringing its 3G patents. Even though Samsung lost the Californian war, but South
Korean giant was winning small battles around the world- the South Korean and the
Japanese courts ruled in favor of Samsung refusing Apples plea for $1.275 million in
damages for the patent covering media sync between devices allegedly infringed by
Samsung. Meanwhile, in spite of winning several injunctions, Apple faced a big deal of
humiliation when the Court of Appeal of England and Wales ordered Apple to pay legal
fees of Samsung after publishing a misleading public notice as ordered by the Court. The
Court ordered Apple only to acknowledge on its website that Samsung did not copy iPad
design, but Apple added winning previous injunctions in US and Germany. This made the
jury to ask Apple to pay Samsungs legal fees.


Figure 7: Apple iPad and Galaxy Tab

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/26/3557788/apple-ipad-samsung-galaxy-
tab-design-acknowledgement/in/2297513

As of 2012, the two companies were embroiled in more than 50 lawsuits with the partial
victory of Apple with Apple winning $1.049 billion for damages in the California court and
Samsung winning small battles in Tokyo and South Korea. Samsung also managed to save
its product from bans.






2013
Earlier in the year 2013, US Federal Court Judge ordered to minimize the scope of the
lawsuit as every time the two companies appear in the courtroom they add up new devices
consuming considerable time and energy of the court. As of June 2013 the latest development
in the Apple vs Samsung legal battle was the denial of a San Jose Court to Apple for adding
Galaxy S4 to the patent case against Samsung. Also US International Trade Commission
banned sales of certain Apple products after finding that Apple violated Samsung Patents.
But the US Trade Representative vetoed the ban allowing Apple to retain selling its products.
With the judges growing increasingly impatient over Apple and Samsung legal manoeuvre,
US President Obama plans to curb the patent rolls for unnecessary suits being filed by the
companies. In August 2013, the US International Trade Commission blocked imports of
some Samsung devices after they were found to violate two Apple patents but cleared the
company of four other patents. The US Trade Representative has 60 days to veto the ban. The
lawsuit is still pending with hearing due for November 2013.


















Conclusion:
By studying the whole case on Apple vs Samsung, we can find that infringement is very
common in case of design and manufacture. But Apple filed case on Samsung and other
companies to prevent them from infringing its technology and product designs. Due to
litigation as they are about to break their relationship, it is not beneficial for both of them.
Samsung was a key manufacturer for Apple in its initial products such as iPods, MacBooks,
etc. We get to know that Samsung violated Apples intellectual property by using some of
Apples patents which Samsung had access to when the two were allies.















References:
1. Apple Inc. Available on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.
2. Bishop, B. (2012) Jury: Samsung Copied Apple, Should pay at least $1.049 billion in
damages. Available on http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/24/3254422/apple-samsung-
trial-verdict/in/2297513
3. Bishop, B. (2012) Samsung Accuses Apple of Ripping Off Patented Email, Photo And
Music Features. Available on http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/14/3242454/samsung-
apple-trial-patented-email-photo-music-features/in/2297513
4. Kersey, B. (2012) Apples Revised Samsung Design Statement Printed in UK
Newspaper. Available on http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/2/3589674/apple-samsung-
design-acknowledgement-uk-newspapers/in/2297513
5. Patel, N. (2011) Apple Sues Samsung: A Complete Lawsuit Analysis. Available on
http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-analysis//in/2297513
6. Patel, N. (2011) Samsung Sues Apple For Infringing 10 Patents: A Closerlook. Available
on http://www.theverge.com/2011/04/29/samsung-sues-apple-infringing-10-patents-
closer//in/2297513
7. Patel, N. (2012) Samsung Angers Judge By Sending Rejected Evidence From Apple Trial
To The Media. Available on http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/31/3209204/samsung-
angers-judge-by-sending-media-rejected-evidence-in-apple-trial/in/2297513
8. Macari, M. (2012) Samsung Fails to Ban iPhones and iPads in Netherlands in big victory
for Apple. Available on http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/14/2871214/dutch-court-
iphones-ipads-no-ban/in/2297513
9. Robertson, A. (2013) Apple Cant Add Galaxy S4 to Latest Samsung Patent Lawsuit,
Says Judge. Available on http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/27/4469940/judge-denies-
apple-attempt-to-add-galaxy-s4-to-samsung-patent-suit/in/2297513
10. Samsung Electronics Available on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Electronics
11. Toor, A. (2012) Judge Sanctions Samsung For Destroying Evidence In Infringement Case
Against Apple. Available on http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/26/3187783/judge-
sanctions-samsung-apple-patent-trial-evidence/in/2297513