According to earlier reports, we learned that Apple and Samsung’s patent infringement case is scheduled to begin in California on the 30th of this month. Prior to this, the CEOs of the two companies had tried out-of-court negotiations. However, the opinions of the two sides have always been mixed. The meeting court has always been difficult to avoid. In addition to condemning Samsung's plagiarism in the prosecution documents before the trial, Apple also claimed that Samsung must pay $2.5 billion in infringement fees.
The new day will naturally have new dialogues. According to the latest news from The Wall Street Journal, Samsung has also drafted sued files against Apple. In this document, Samsung pointed out that Apple is the real plagiarist.
Samsung said that as early as 1991, the company had invented mobile phone technology that can be used in today's smart phones. The iPhone was only released after 16 years. If Apple did not copy Samsung's technology, even an iPhone could not be sold.
In addition, Samsung also believes that there is no plagiarism in Apple's design, because the iPhone's design is all borrowed from competitors such as Sony, and Samsung's mobile phone uses only the design concept in the public domain. In the end, Samsung also emphasized that although Apple is Samsung's major customer in the flash, memory, and processor of the iPhone, Apple did not pay a penny for using technology from Samsung.
related news:
Apple Samsung set off a patent century war: innovation plagiarism difficult to define Beijing time on July 25 news, according to foreign media reports, Apple and Samsung's two major technology giants on the iPhone and Android patent litigation has become increasingly heated. Whether it is innovation or plagiarism, both sides will stage a century battle.
The following is the full text of the article:
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. has just overtaken Apple in the near future to become the world's largest smart phone manufacturer.
However, Samsung has surpassed Apple through legal means, or as Apple said, it is through the plagiarism of iPhone and iPad design to become the global smartphone dominant, which also requires a court jury to make a ruling. However, such a ruling is like a dice roll full of uncertainty, even the most fierce competitors often avoid. Unless the two parties reached a settlement at the last minute, the federal court in San Jose, California, will reopen the trial of Apple’s patent infringement lawsuit against Android on Monday. The case will once again verify Apple's design plagiarism and patent infringement lawsuits filed against Android smartphones and tablet makers worldwide.
Reflect on the patent examination and approval system
The global patent litigation in this mobile phone field also dates back to 2009, when Apple and Nokia launched infringement lawsuits each other. From then on, the global technology giants were mostly involved in this war. This litigation dispute also provided material for critics of the US patent approval system, including members of the United States Congress.
A common consensus held by critics is that the US Patent and Trademark Office (US Patent and Trademark Office) and other similar institutions have approved too many patent applications in recent years, especially in software design. This led patent holders to sue the court on grounds of infringement. According to statistics released by technology market research organization IDC, in the first quarter of this year, Samsung surpassed Apple with a share of 29% of global smartphone shipments, becoming the world's largest mobile phone maker, and Apple relegated to second place with a 23% share. . Samsung's best-selling smartphone models use the Android operating system.
Offensive and defensive battles
In this examination and approval, Apple will inevitably make a point: To a large extent, Samsung has become the overlord of global smartphones by deliberately formulating corporate strategies for plagiarizing Apple's product designs. Samsung is also likely to respond to Apple's unique design. Samsung even said that Apple infringed on some of the patent rights held by the company, including two patents related to mobile phone transmissions.
A Samsung spokesperson said: "Samsung has proved several times in court that Apple's lawsuit is unreasonable and lacks basis."
An Apple spokesperson also reiterated Apple’s position in the courtroom that “Samsung’s blatant plagiarism is completely wrong†and Apple will continue to strive to protect its intellectual property rights. Once Samsung is forced to remove its products or bypass Apple’s patents to design handsets, this will help Apple win market competition against Samsung. Intellectual property professionals said that Apple’s patent litigation against Samsung is unlikely to win, and it is unlikely that the forced suspension of Samsung’s mobile phone products will occur.
There is a high risk of litigation
For global companies such as Apple and Samsung, the jury trials may be extremely risky. The 10 jurors in this case not only have the right to determine the legal obligations of both parties, but also have the right to determine the amount of compensation that the two parties will pay. Most jurors are likely to be knowledgeable outside the software design or patent system.
Both parties’ rounds of negotiations have failed to achieve substantive results. Since the first infringement lawsuit initiated 15 months ago, the two sides have conducted several rounds of negotiation on this issue. From technical details to public language statements, the two sides almost mobilized all the evidence that could be used against each other to negotiate.
What is puzzling is that Apple is the largest customer in the Samsung Accessories Division, which produces chips and displays for smartphones and tablets.
The final outcome of the disputed case between Apple and Samsung may affect the development track of several other patent dispute cases currently under way. As of now, there are no absolute winners for such lawsuits. It can even be said that many companies do this simply to ensure that their products are not forced to go offline due to patent issues. Michael Carrier, an intellectual property expert and law professor at Rutgers University in Camden, New Jersey, pointed out: "Apple has always insisted that the company designed a smartphone and Android Cell phone manufacturers have plagiarized these designs." Carrill said that whether the jury verdict “supports or opposes Apple’s view†may lead companies involved in the case to re-examine their positions and may promote the reconciliation process in other cases.
The trial judge faces a test
The 43-year-old Lucy H. Koh will be responsible for this trial, and she is a patented judge. Prior to his appointment as a judge, Koch had worked as a private patent attorney for nine years, and she had also dealt with a patent case against Apple. The lawyers’ colleagues commented on her as smart and hard-working. She thought she was a more formal judge in the Bay Area than any other federal judge.
Nevertheless, this trial is also a test for Koch. A Silicon Valley attorney claimed that the trial was a "baptism of fire" for Koch. Koch served as a federal judge for only two years and has not conducted such a large-scale trial.
At the request of Apple, Koch issued a ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computers in June until the trial results were released. Koch pointed out: "Of course, Samsung has the right to compete, but the company does not have the right to engage in unfair competition in the way that infringing products flood the market."
Despite this, Apple took most of the pressure during the trial because the company had to convince the jury that Samsung’s smartphones and tablets did infringe Apple’s nine patents. Among them, Apple believes that Samsung's products copied the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad. Apple will also sue Samsung for copying its own "rubber banding" patent. This term is used to describe the process of disappearing and resetting the smartphone image from the edge of the screen when the user's finger is scrolling. In addition to the design, Apple's allegations include how the iPhone or iPad communicates with the back-end operating system when the screen is touched.
Lawyers have their own strengths
For Apple lawyers, talking with a group of non-technically trained jurors is a big challenge. The Apple lawyers' team is headed by Harold McElhinny of Morrison & Foerster. As a native of the West Coast, Americans, 65-year-old Maxine is a qualified intellectual property lawyer in Silicon Valley. In the 1990s, McHinny represented Fujitsu in winning lawsuits against IBM on software copyright. At the beginning of the 21st century, he also represented EchoStar Communications, a cable set-top box manufacturer, in winning a patent dispute against Gemstar-TV Guide International. William Lee, an intellectual property attorney of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP, is the chief architect of the Apple Litigation Defense Strategy.
For Samsung lawyers, the challenges are somewhat different. Samsung’s lead lawyer is Charles Verhoeven from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan. The 49-year-old Ferhfin was born in Iowa, USA, and is a mild-spoken lawyer. Previously, he had already made several confrontations with Apple on behalf of the Android camp. For Ferhefen, he must do his best to make things simple and thus gain the support of the jury.
Samsung will most likely benefit from it once the jurors feel confused. Florian Mueller, a patent expert and intellectual property advisor, said: “If the final jury is still confused, it will be Samsung rather than Apple. It will only benefit Samsung.†Muller is not Member of the lawyers of both parties.
Innovation, plagiarism is difficult to define
In addition to filing several patent lawsuits against Apple, Samsung’s lawyers will also dispute the design patents for the iPhone and iPad. Samsung believes that Apple's design of these two devices is not the first of its kind as claimed by the company. Therefore, Samsung's equipment does not constitute illegal copying and does not constitute patent infringement.
Samsung will insist that tablet computers should be flat and their shapes should be rectangular. Smartphones should be suitable for one-handed operation. These are the requirements of product features and should not be included in the scope of patent infringement.
Carrell of Rutgers University pointed out: “This is like a microwave oven. The specific features determine the specific appearance. This is also true for smartphones and tablets. Some similarities do not always imply patent infringement.â€
Based on the court's statement, Muller said that Apple did not invent iPods and iPhones out of thin air. This is a "very clear" fact. Apple has only transformed existing product innovation to some extent.
Mueller acknowledged that Samsung has many similar products with Apple's appearance, but he said: "The innovation process is mostly like this, and it is not out of thin air. Therefore the question that arises is: Can we draw a line between innovation and plagiarism? Obvious line. This is not an issue that anyone can easily answer."
The new day will naturally have new dialogues. According to the latest news from The Wall Street Journal, Samsung has also drafted sued files against Apple. In this document, Samsung pointed out that Apple is the real plagiarist.
Samsung said that as early as 1991, the company had invented mobile phone technology that can be used in today's smart phones. The iPhone was only released after 16 years. If Apple did not copy Samsung's technology, even an iPhone could not be sold.
In addition, Samsung also believes that there is no plagiarism in Apple's design, because the iPhone's design is all borrowed from competitors such as Sony, and Samsung's mobile phone uses only the design concept in the public domain. In the end, Samsung also emphasized that although Apple is Samsung's major customer in the flash, memory, and processor of the iPhone, Apple did not pay a penny for using technology from Samsung.
related news:
Apple Samsung set off a patent century war: innovation plagiarism difficult to define Beijing time on July 25 news, according to foreign media reports, Apple and Samsung's two major technology giants on the iPhone and Android patent litigation has become increasingly heated. Whether it is innovation or plagiarism, both sides will stage a century battle.
The following is the full text of the article:
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. has just overtaken Apple in the near future to become the world's largest smart phone manufacturer.
However, Samsung has surpassed Apple through legal means, or as Apple said, it is through the plagiarism of iPhone and iPad design to become the global smartphone dominant, which also requires a court jury to make a ruling. However, such a ruling is like a dice roll full of uncertainty, even the most fierce competitors often avoid. Unless the two parties reached a settlement at the last minute, the federal court in San Jose, California, will reopen the trial of Apple’s patent infringement lawsuit against Android on Monday. The case will once again verify Apple's design plagiarism and patent infringement lawsuits filed against Android smartphones and tablet makers worldwide.
Reflect on the patent examination and approval system
The global patent litigation in this mobile phone field also dates back to 2009, when Apple and Nokia launched infringement lawsuits each other. From then on, the global technology giants were mostly involved in this war. This litigation dispute also provided material for critics of the US patent approval system, including members of the United States Congress.
A common consensus held by critics is that the US Patent and Trademark Office (US Patent and Trademark Office) and other similar institutions have approved too many patent applications in recent years, especially in software design. This led patent holders to sue the court on grounds of infringement. According to statistics released by technology market research organization IDC, in the first quarter of this year, Samsung surpassed Apple with a share of 29% of global smartphone shipments, becoming the world's largest mobile phone maker, and Apple relegated to second place with a 23% share. . Samsung's best-selling smartphone models use the Android operating system.
Offensive and defensive battles
In this examination and approval, Apple will inevitably make a point: To a large extent, Samsung has become the overlord of global smartphones by deliberately formulating corporate strategies for plagiarizing Apple's product designs. Samsung is also likely to respond to Apple's unique design. Samsung even said that Apple infringed on some of the patent rights held by the company, including two patents related to mobile phone transmissions.
A Samsung spokesperson said: "Samsung has proved several times in court that Apple's lawsuit is unreasonable and lacks basis."
An Apple spokesperson also reiterated Apple’s position in the courtroom that “Samsung’s blatant plagiarism is completely wrong†and Apple will continue to strive to protect its intellectual property rights. Once Samsung is forced to remove its products or bypass Apple’s patents to design handsets, this will help Apple win market competition against Samsung. Intellectual property professionals said that Apple’s patent litigation against Samsung is unlikely to win, and it is unlikely that the forced suspension of Samsung’s mobile phone products will occur.
There is a high risk of litigation
For global companies such as Apple and Samsung, the jury trials may be extremely risky. The 10 jurors in this case not only have the right to determine the legal obligations of both parties, but also have the right to determine the amount of compensation that the two parties will pay. Most jurors are likely to be knowledgeable outside the software design or patent system.
Both parties’ rounds of negotiations have failed to achieve substantive results. Since the first infringement lawsuit initiated 15 months ago, the two sides have conducted several rounds of negotiation on this issue. From technical details to public language statements, the two sides almost mobilized all the evidence that could be used against each other to negotiate.
What is puzzling is that Apple is the largest customer in the Samsung Accessories Division, which produces chips and displays for smartphones and tablets.
The final outcome of the disputed case between Apple and Samsung may affect the development track of several other patent dispute cases currently under way. As of now, there are no absolute winners for such lawsuits. It can even be said that many companies do this simply to ensure that their products are not forced to go offline due to patent issues. Michael Carrier, an intellectual property expert and law professor at Rutgers University in Camden, New Jersey, pointed out: "Apple has always insisted that the company designed a smartphone and Android Cell phone manufacturers have plagiarized these designs." Carrill said that whether the jury verdict “supports or opposes Apple’s view†may lead companies involved in the case to re-examine their positions and may promote the reconciliation process in other cases.
The trial judge faces a test
The 43-year-old Lucy H. Koh will be responsible for this trial, and she is a patented judge. Prior to his appointment as a judge, Koch had worked as a private patent attorney for nine years, and she had also dealt with a patent case against Apple. The lawyers’ colleagues commented on her as smart and hard-working. She thought she was a more formal judge in the Bay Area than any other federal judge.
Nevertheless, this trial is also a test for Koch. A Silicon Valley attorney claimed that the trial was a "baptism of fire" for Koch. Koch served as a federal judge for only two years and has not conducted such a large-scale trial.
At the request of Apple, Koch issued a ban on Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computers in June until the trial results were released. Koch pointed out: "Of course, Samsung has the right to compete, but the company does not have the right to engage in unfair competition in the way that infringing products flood the market."
Despite this, Apple took most of the pressure during the trial because the company had to convince the jury that Samsung’s smartphones and tablets did infringe Apple’s nine patents. Among them, Apple believes that Samsung's products copied the "look and feel" of the iPhone and iPad. Apple will also sue Samsung for copying its own "rubber banding" patent. This term is used to describe the process of disappearing and resetting the smartphone image from the edge of the screen when the user's finger is scrolling. In addition to the design, Apple's allegations include how the iPhone or iPad communicates with the back-end operating system when the screen is touched.
Lawyers have their own strengths
For Apple lawyers, talking with a group of non-technically trained jurors is a big challenge. The Apple lawyers' team is headed by Harold McElhinny of Morrison & Foerster. As a native of the West Coast, Americans, 65-year-old Maxine is a qualified intellectual property lawyer in Silicon Valley. In the 1990s, McHinny represented Fujitsu in winning lawsuits against IBM on software copyright. At the beginning of the 21st century, he also represented EchoStar Communications, a cable set-top box manufacturer, in winning a patent dispute against Gemstar-TV Guide International. William Lee, an intellectual property attorney of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP, is the chief architect of the Apple Litigation Defense Strategy.
For Samsung lawyers, the challenges are somewhat different. Samsung’s lead lawyer is Charles Verhoeven from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan. The 49-year-old Ferhfin was born in Iowa, USA, and is a mild-spoken lawyer. Previously, he had already made several confrontations with Apple on behalf of the Android camp. For Ferhefen, he must do his best to make things simple and thus gain the support of the jury.
Samsung will most likely benefit from it once the jurors feel confused. Florian Mueller, a patent expert and intellectual property advisor, said: “If the final jury is still confused, it will be Samsung rather than Apple. It will only benefit Samsung.†Muller is not Member of the lawyers of both parties.
Innovation, plagiarism is difficult to define
In addition to filing several patent lawsuits against Apple, Samsung’s lawyers will also dispute the design patents for the iPhone and iPad. Samsung believes that Apple's design of these two devices is not the first of its kind as claimed by the company. Therefore, Samsung's equipment does not constitute illegal copying and does not constitute patent infringement.
Samsung will insist that tablet computers should be flat and their shapes should be rectangular. Smartphones should be suitable for one-handed operation. These are the requirements of product features and should not be included in the scope of patent infringement.
Carrell of Rutgers University pointed out: “This is like a microwave oven. The specific features determine the specific appearance. This is also true for smartphones and tablets. Some similarities do not always imply patent infringement.â€
Based on the court's statement, Muller said that Apple did not invent iPods and iPhones out of thin air. This is a "very clear" fact. Apple has only transformed existing product innovation to some extent.
Mueller acknowledged that Samsung has many similar products with Apple's appearance, but he said: "The innovation process is mostly like this, and it is not out of thin air. Therefore the question that arises is: Can we draw a line between innovation and plagiarism? Obvious line. This is not an issue that anyone can easily answer."
Medium Voltage Unarmored Cable
Medium voltage unarmored cable is a type of Power Cable used for transmitting electrical energy at voltages ranging from 8.7kV to 15kV. It is designed for use in various applications such as industrial, commercial, and residential buildings, as well as in outdoor environments.
Medium voltage unarmored cable is made up of a copper or aluminum conductor, an insulating layer, and an outer sheath. The conductor is usually stranded to allow for flexibility and to reduce the risk of breakage. The insulating layer is made of a material such as XLPE or EPR which provides excellent electrical insulation and resistance to heat and moisture.
The outer sheath is made of PVC or PE which provides protection against mechanical damage, moisture, and chemicals. Unarmored cables do not have any metallic armor or shielding, which makes them lighter and more flexible than armored cables.
Medium voltage unarmored cables are suitable for a wide range of applications including underground and overhead power transmission, distribution, and substation connections. They are also used in renewable energy systems such as wind and solar power plants.
In summary, medium voltage unarmored cables are a reliable and cost-effective solution for transmitting electrical energy over medium distances. They are designed to meet the highest standards of safety, quality, and performance, and are widely used in various industries and applications.
Unarmoured Medium Voltage Cable,Copper Power Cable,Copper Heat Resistant Flexible Wire,Oxygen-free Copper Cable,Medium Voltage Cables
Ruitian Cable CO.,LTD. , https://www.rtlinecable.com