Apple and Samsung Both Get South Korea Bans

New submitter Mackadoodledoo sends this quote from the BBC: "A South Korean court has ruled that Apple and Samsung both infringed each other's patents on mobile devices. The court imposed a limited ban on national sales of products by both companies covered by the ruling. It ruled that U.S.-based Apple had infringed two patents held by Samsung, while the Korean firm had violated one of Apple's patents. The sales ban will apply to Apple's iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and its tablets the iPad and iPad 2. Samsung products affected by the ban include its smartphone models Galaxy SI and SII and its Galaxy Tab and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet PCs."

Re:Damages

[thaylin]

Apple infringed 2 essential patents, Samsung 1 design patent, apple should have had to pay more.

The Judge(s) don't want to be LYNCHED

[wisebabo]

Considering that Samsung, just ONE CONGLOMERATE, generates 20% of the entire country of Korea's GDP, I hardly think the judge(s) would be capable of being impartial.

Korean's are quite "feisty" (I've got some blood). I've been in numerous protests in Seoul where students would fight the police for days over some perceived fault by the U.S. Demonstrations by striking workers quickly become violent.

Re:Finally!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the iPhone 4S is the current Apple flagship, and the Galaxy S3 is the current Samsung flagship. The products banned are all at least one generation old.

Re:Finally!

[somersault]

Recent? Kind of. Flagship models? Those would be iPhone 4S and Galaxy S3.

Re:Damages

[Dupple]

Samsung bought the suit in this instance in April last year

http://samsungtomorrow.com/1126 [samsungtomorrow.com]

in response to Apple filling suit in the United States

Re:Thats one way..

[Steve Max]

He didn't ban the Galaxy S3. Nor the iPhone 4S. Nor the new iPad. Nor the latest Samsung tablets. It's a "win" for Samsung because they'll earn a slightly bigger reward, but that's it.

Re:Thats one way..

[fredprado]

Yes, unlike copyright, patent problems are more related to the absurdity of what is patented than the time they cover.

Re:How's the thermonuclear war goin' for ya, Steve

[DickBreath]

MAD only works when all of the players are rational and sane. It worked for a long time because nobody is willing to pull the trigger, not even dancing monkey boy of the flying chairs, because doing so would be insane.

Enter Apple.

Steve: “Good artists copy, great artists steal. And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.”

Also Steve said don't steal our technology, invent your own. Yet Apple doesn't sue over technology but over mere style and perception and obvious design choices. Yet in the biggest hypocrisy ever, Apple won't license FRAND patents that are by definition Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory, and which others have taken a license for. Because Apple is special. Apple being special is not surprising considering that Steve himself was special enough that he should be able to park in handicapped parking spaces when it suits him. Whenever countersued over FRAND patents, Apple complains "but hey, this is an FRAND patent -- standards essential -- no fair!". Then why doesn't Apple buy a license for that patent like everyone else? If anything, the fact that it is standards essential, and FRAND ought to be a powerful reason to ban products from the market -- after all the license is *reasonable* and *fair*. But I guess it's not fair when Apple is the defendant.

In the California case of Apple vs Samsung, perhaps the best outcome would be to simply ban both company's accused products from the market. This would still leave Samsung with phones and tablets that are not infringing and could be sold. It would leave Apple with none. Meanwhile Samsung also can continue selling dishwashers and other appliances, TVs and other consumer electronics, jet aircraft engines, etc.

Re:Thats one way..

[guttentag]

Apple's Penalty
$35,000 payment to Samsung for infringement on 2 patents
Ban on iPhone 3GS
Ban on iPhone 4
Ban on iPad 1
Ban on iPad 2

Samsung's Penalty
$22,000 payment to Apple for infringement on 1 patent
Ban on Galaxy S2
Ban on "certain other products"

Net Cost
Apple pays Samsung $13,000 (about the cost of an entry-level Hyundai)
Each side loses millions of dollars in sales of its banned devices
Samsung loses additional money because Apple buys components for the banned devices from Samsung [digitaltrends.com]
Each side pays its legal team hundreds of thousands of dollars for the representation.
Corporate legal teams assure CEOs it was worth it because the costs will be much higher if they don't defend their patents.