BR PPT_compressed.pdfmmmmmmmmmmmmmnnnmnn mmm

Mmmmmmmmmmmmsbaggwgshvwhwgcwhevsbdywvuwgiwiwv72tgevjzbHavgsgusbsidbjzbsigwywvzisbjsvyzywgsvzjbayeosplnabxnanqgusvzbzjJbshzhzjshhwidbwkyrptmzbvgdjsnbxvnzjsjd

1. APPLE
VS
SAMSUNG

2. OVERVIEW ON APPLE CO.
Founding and Evolution: Apple Inc. was
founded in 1976 by Steve Jobs, Steve
Wozniak, and Ronald Wayne.
Iconic Products: Apple has introduced
several groundbreaking products, including
the Macintosh (1984), iPod (2001), iPhone
(2007), iPad (2010), and Apple Watch
(2015),
Market Leadership: Apple is one of the world's
most valuable and profitable companies, with a
significant impact on the tech industry.

3. OVERVIEW ON SAMSUNG CO.
Samsung Electronics, a subsidiary, is renowned for
its wide array of products, including smartphones
(Galaxy series), home appliances, semiconductors,
televisions, and display panels. The company is a
leading manufacturer in many of these categories.
As one of the largest conglomerates in South
Korea, Samsung contributes significantly to the
country's economy. It consistently ranks high in
terms of revenue and profit,
Founded in 1938 by Lee Byung-chul in South
Korea, Samsung started as a trading company and
expanded into various industries,

4. OVERVIEW ON CASE
STUDY [ PATENT ]
The Apple vs. Samsung case study highlights
the intense rivalry between the two tech
giants, particularly over smartphone patents.
Beginning in 2011, Apple accused Samsung of
copying the iPhone's design and features,
leading to numerous lawsuits across various
countries. The legal battles resulted in mixed
outcomes, substantial financial penalties, and
a complex discourse on innovation and
intellectual property rights, significantly
impacting the global tech industry and
competitive dynamics.

5. MAJOR ISSUES
DESIGN PATENT UTILITY PATENT TRADE DRESS
THE FRONT FACE OF
IPHONE
THE ROUNDED
RECTANGULAR SHAPE OF
IPHONE
THE GRAPHICAL USER
INTERFACE OF IPHONE
‘BOUNCE-BACK’ EFFECTS
WHILE SCROLLING APPS
A SINGLE APPLICATION
FOR TOUCH BASED
DEVICES
TAP TO ZOOM
FUNCTIONALITY
APPLE ACCUSED
SAMSUNG OF COPYING
THE OVERALL LOOK AND
FEEL OF ITS PRODUCT, A
LEGAL CONCEPT KNOWN
AS TRADE DRESS

6. SAMSUNG ARGUED THAT
APPLE INFRINGED ON
SEVERAL OF ITS PATENETS
RELATED TO WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY
SAMSUNG COUNTER CLAIM

7. LEGAL
ACTIONS/PROCEEDINGS
Apple sued Samsung in April 2011 in California,
leading Samsung to countersue. In 2012, a jury
awarded Apple $1.05 billion, but Samsung's
appeals led to multiple retrials. In December
2016, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with
Samsung on design patent damages, ruling that
damages should be based on profits from
individual components, not the entire product.
The case was remanded to lower courts for
reassessment, highlighting complexities in
patent litigation.

8. LEGAL ACTIONS WITH THEIR
OUTCOMES
1. Initial Lawsuit Filing (April 2011)
Event: Apple filed a lawsuit against Samsung in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California.
Outcome: This lawsuit marked the beginning of the global legal battle, with Apple
alleging that Samsung's smartphones and tablets infringed on its patents and copied its
design.
2. Initial Verdict (August 2012)
Event: A jury in the Northern District of California ruled in favor of Apple.
Outcome: Apple was awarded $1.05 billion in damages. The jury found that Samsung had
infringed on several of Apple’s design and utility patents, and had diluted Apple’s trade
dress.

9. 3. Appeals and Retrials (2013-2015)
Event: Samsung appealed the initial verdict, leading to a series of retrials and appeals.
Outcome: The damages awarded to Apple were revised multiple times. In one retrial in
2013, the damages were reduced to $598 million. Various other rulings and settlements
occurred over these years, further adjusting the amount.
4. Supreme Court Ruling (December 2016)
Event: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the issue of design patent damages.
Outcome: The Court decided that damages for design patent infringement could be
based on the profits from individual components of the infringing products, rather than
the entire product. This decision led to the case being sent back to the lower courts for
reassessment of damages.
5. Final Settlement (June 2018)
Event: After years of litigation and numerous appeals, Apple and Samsung reached a
final settlement.
Outcome: The terms of the settlement were not publicly disclosed, but this agreement
effectively ended the long-standing patent disputes between the two companies,
bringing closure to a significant chapter in tech industry litigation.

10. END OF PATENT WAR
{CASE}
In June 2018, Apple and Samsung reached a
confidential settlement, concluding their
lengthy patent disputes. The case underscored
the critical role of design and utility patents in
the tech industry, highlighting the need for
clear and distinct product designs to prevent
legal issues. Additionally, it led to changes in
patent law, particularly in the interpretation of
design patents and the calculation of damages
for patent infringement, influencing future
legal standards and practices.

11. KEY TAKEAWAYS OF THIS CASE
1.Design vs. Functionality:
The case highlighted the importance of distinguishing between design and functionality
in patent law.
2.Global Implications:
Although the primary legal battle was in the U.S., similar lawsuits were filed
internationally.
The case influenced global patent litigation strategies.
3.Market Dynamics:
The prolonged legal conflict impacted the strategies and relationships of major tech
companies.
It affected how companies approached collaboration and competition in the tech
industry.
4.Landmark Case:
The case is a significant example of the complexities involved in patent disputes within
the rapidly evolving technology sector.

12. CONCLUSION
The 2011 Apple vs. Samsung patent case was a landmark legal battle in the
tech industry, where Apple accused Samsung of copying its iPhone design and
technology. The initial verdict in 2012 awarded Apple $1.05 billion, but
subsequent appeals and retrials adjusted this figure. The U.S. Supreme
Court's 2016 decision on design patent damages led to further reassessment.
The case concluded with a confidential settlement in June 2018. This high-
profile dispute underscored the importance of clear and distinct design and
utility patents, influenced global patent litigation, and highlighted the
complex dynamics of competition and collaboration in the tech sector.

13. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH!
TO ALL