What If Edison Witnessed the Samsung-Apple Patent Lawsuit?

Centaurs in the Greek mythology were a ferocious species with barbarians’ upper bodies and horses’ lower bodies. Born of Ixion and the Cloud, who defiled the sanctity to be cursed by Zeus, these hostile creates ate raw meat and killed innocent people. 

Another monster Procrustes used to seduce humans and cut off their legs upon finding that they were too tall to fit in the bed. The phrase ‘Procrustean bed’ stemmed from this episode.

One of the monstrous creatures in the Norse mythology was a troll. Dwelling in caves or dark forest, it ate raw meat and enjoyed killing for the hell of it. In Northern Europe, “Troll will come and get you” must have been one of the scariest threats to spoiled children. 

An increasing volume of criticisms is spreading out that Apple, who once ushered in “a new era of going around and enjoying the Internet”, is turning into a Patent Troll. 

The US district court in San Jose, California, ruled on 6th last month that Samsung must pay USD 930 million to Apple for patent infringement. Both Apple and Samsung appealed, and in the second lawsuit, Apple claimed Samsung should pay USD 2 billion to Apple for infringing five patents. The legal battle will go on take place three times a week. 

Reporting this lawsuit, Forbes, an American Economy Journal, noted that Apple was demanding compensation 10 to 20 times as much as the patent fee experts assumed. Other policy making journals also pointed out Apple’s demand was an unprecedented case which was corrupting the American patent system. 

IT experts in the United States are afraid apple will extend their attack in the full scale on the Google bloc in case great part of Apple's demand is accepted. Then it will lead to a significant increase in mobile device prices, which will eventually weaken the whole development of the info-communication technology, they asserted. 

In 2011, when Apple began to file the lawsuit against Samsung, most IT experts around the world considered it as just a powerful setup to hold Samsung’s chase in check. As the battle between two giants expanded with Samsung’s counteraction, they predicted the two will reach a consensus and establish their ‘rule of coexistence’ in the end. 

However, the situation is going into an uncontrollable skid. Apple is seemingly focusing on increasing revenue on the patent war, rather than closing the war as soon as possible and then contending in the market with new products, which is testified by its enormous amount of compensation that dumbfounds even the experts. 

The change in Apple’s strategy is closely linked to the current market condition. In 2012, the absolute dominator, who first opened the global smartphone market, gave in the first rank to Samsung with its market share 19.4. Samsung’s was 30.4%. Last year Samsung’s share went up to 32.3% while Apple’s continued to plummet to 15.5%. 

Strategic Analytics(SA), a market research consultant, predicted Samsung would hold the dominant position selling 92 million smartphones (36.2%) in the first quarter, which is more than twice as many as Apple’s 43 million (17%). Many specialized institutes are foreseeing Samsung’s ongoing predominance. 

▶Why Apple Chooses to be a Patent Troll? 

Samsung’s great leaping arises from its incessantly showcasing new products to the market. On the other hand, Apple, who introducing innovative products continuously when Steve Jobs was alive, is preoccupied with proven products rather than innovative ones. 

Apple’s complacency explains why even American consumers, not to mention of European and Asian ones, are steering their way to Samsung’s and away from Apple's.

When consumers respond coldly, Apple chose to turn to the patent war against Samsung and Google to recover reduced sales instead of putting risky but differentiated and innovative products in the market. 

The legal battle will be reaching its conclusion on 29th April, but the situation is never favorable to Samsung. 

Most of all, the battleground is located in the heart of the United States. As proven to be true so far, the Obama administration has publicly supported Apple. In particular, all the 10 jury members selected by the court are policemen, store clerks, and teachers and not a single one is an IT experts. 

Auto-fill, data tapping, voice recognition search, data synchronization and slide-to-unlock functions are the main patents which Apple claimed to be infringed. There is an increasing criticism that the jury without IT experts will surely have no idea what they are and what issues are at stake. As before, the judgment may be turn into a patriotic trial, a union under the Stars-and-Stripes flag. 

In this battle, Apple pushed the ‘slide-to-unlock’ patent (applied in June 2009 and approved in October 2011) as the major issue. However, this technology was already adopted in N1m mobile phone, which was released by a Swedish company Neonode. This was what made all the European courts turn down Apple’s case, but only American courts approve this as Apple's patents. The trio of Apple, American government, and American courts are driving Samsung into a corner in an accord. 

▶ What If the First Mobile Phone Has Exacted Huge Patent Fees?

It also happened in the Middle Age somebody snatches others’ new ideas worked on for decades. The Venetian patent act in 1474 was designed to protect the original inventors. Nevertheless excessive patent rights have also slowed down the advance of new technologies. 

For centuries, governments around the world have been involved in the matter of how far the patent rights should be granted, giving credits to the owners of the patent rights. These endeavors are enduring until these days. Too less recognition of patent rights leads to mushrooming of similar technologies and infringing the rights of first inventors, but when it’s excessive, it disturbs the emergence of new technology. 

Human race’s technologies develop as hundreds of refining touches are added to the first new inventions. 

When Martin Cooper invented the first cellular phone in 1973, it weighed 1kg and was 25cm long. If he had applied for a comprehensive “mobile phone device” patent and asked for dozens of dollars per similar device, we could have never enjoyed this smartphone paradise. 

A similar case goes to incandescent bulbs. If Thomas Edison, who also worked in the patent office and became familiar with patent process, had applied for a comprehensive right of his incandescent bulb and had asked for inordinate fees on similar devices, we would have never witnessed the technological development from fluorescent bulbs to LEDs, which are lighting up the world today. 

I wonder what Edison (1847-1931), who considered inventing as his calling and contributed immensely to the human race, might say if he attended as a jury member in the court of San Jose. **