The following case study is of how and why the two world's biggest mobile tech companies fall

into the legal battle with each other. Apple and Samsung are the leading companies and used to
get along great until 2010 when Samsung started selling android devices and Steve jobs who was
the founder of Apple started hating Samsung and once stated that Samsung is the "stolen
product"- a ripoff of the iphone.
So, in 2005 when Apple was about to launch their iphones, just before that Apple filed a suite of
4 design patents covering the basic shape of the iPhone. These were followed up in June of that
year with a massive filing of a color design patent covering 193 screen shots of various
iPhone graphical user interfaces.
Till 2010 it was going great until Samsung came into the market and Apple felt that Samsung had
infringed their Apple patents but then Samsung was the major Apple supplier and a trusted partner"
and also Apple spends billions on Samsung flash memory, screens, processors, and other
components. Apple thought it would be risky to enter into such legal battleground but eventually
apple realized that they don't have any other choice.
At First Apple tried to settle the dispute among themselves and called for a meeting with Samsung.
Apple proposed Samsung to pay up to $30 per phone an $40 per tablet. In comparison, six months
earlier HTC agreed to pay Microsoft a reported $5 for every Android device sold. But Samsung
declines.
As Apple had no choice left for them and therefore in 2011, Apple filed a suit against Samsung in
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., that was the first case in the series of ongoing
lawsuit between the two parties. Apple claimed that Samsungs Galaxy phones embodies a

combination of several elements of the Apple Product Configuration Trade Dress namely, a
product configuration with:
a rectangular product shape with all four corners uniformly rounded
the front surface of the product dominated by a screen surface with black borders
substantial black borders above and below the screen having roughly equal width and narrower
black borders on either side of the screen having roughly equal width
a metallic surround framing the perimeter of the top surface
a display of a grid of colorful square icons with uniformly rounded corners

 a bottom row of icons set off from the other icons and that do not change as the other pages of
the user interface are viewed
Within days after Apple sued Samsung, Samsung countersues over 3G technology patents, and
takes the fight international by filing claims against Apple in Japan, Germany, and Korea.
August 2011, Apple and Samsung were litigating 19 ongoing cases in nine countries. By
October, the legal disputes expanded to ten countries. By July 2012, the two companies were still
embroiled in more than 50 lawsuits around the globe, with billions of dollars in damages claimed
between them.
WHAT LAW SAYS
A patent is a right, granted to an inventor, to exclude others from making, distributing, copying,
using or importing an invention throughout without the inventor's permission. A patent is a right
which basically motivates the inventor to come up with new invention and also to protect their
invention
The current design patent infringement test (colloquially known as the ordinary observer test)
was first laid down by the United States Supreme Court in 1871 in Gorham Co v White. In
Gorham, where the design patent at issue regarded an ornamental design for a handle on
flatware, the Court declared that there was infringement if in the eye of an ordinary observer,
giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, two designs are substantially the same. The
test is significant in that the Court
(1) rejected the notion that design patent infringement should be decided through the eyes of an
expert, and rather left the decision to the ordinary observer,
(2) rejected a design patent infringement test requiring exactitude, instead opting for a test only
requiring substantial identity in appearance, and
(3) affirmed that design patents, as set forth in the act of Congress, provide a meritorious
service to the public.

In India, The Designs Act 2000 states that the design must be applicable to an article and be
apparent to the eye. In addition to this it must be new or original as at the relevant priority date.
This is to be judged against articles of an analogous character and must be more than an
immaterial difference.
A design refers to the feature of a shape, configuration.
The Designs Act allows for a grace period for disclosures at officially recognized exhibitions
provided that an application for registration is lodged within six months of that disclosure.
Publication without the consent of the designer will not destroy eligibility to obtain registration
but it must be shown that the designer has used all reasonable diligence to seek registration once
he or she has become aware of the prior publication. As is with other formal registration systems
for IP, a process applies in relation to obtaining registration.