Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
The Courts Android Patents Apple

Ban on Certain Samsung Products Appears Likely ITC Ruling 90

Ars Technica reports that "On Friday the ITC filed a redacted version of a remedy suggested by ITC Administrative Law Judge Thomas Pender, in which he recommended a ban be enforced against Samsung products that were found to infringe upon four Apple patents. The judge also recommended that Samsung post a bond for 88 percent of the value of its infringing mobile phones, as well as 32.5 percent of the value of infringing media players, and 37.6 percent of the value of infringing tablets." That sounds like a clear loss for Samsung, but the judge "also approved several workarounds suggested by Samsung that might permit the company to continue selling the implicated products (which include the Transform, Acclaim, Indulge and Intercept smartphones, according to Computerworld). These workarounds would sidestep infringing on Apple's four patents—which include one design patent and three technology patents." Ruling and remedy have yet to be approved by the panel whose word would make them final.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ban on Certain Samsung Products Appears Likely ITC Ruling

Comments Filter:
  • by Richard_J_N ( 631241 ) on Sunday December 30, 2012 @07:46AM (#42425485)

    A large amount of the trouble with patents comes from the fact that:

    * The patent office doesn't have the resources to properly validate platent claims. They basically grant anything, and assume that validity will be litigated in the courts.
    * The courts tend to assume that anything granted must be valid.

    So, why not change it to:

    * The patent office merely registers the patent filing. It acknowledges the inventor's name, and publishes the details. but, at this stage, the patent is not deemed valid..
    * When there is an actual patent suit, this is the time when the patent is carefully examined, and the question of validity can be debated in court.

    Think of this as "lazy-evaluation" for patents.

  • by Richard_J_N ( 631241 ) on Sunday December 30, 2012 @09:01AM (#42425667)

    In the (exceptionally rare) case where a patent is genuinely a good and valid one, the owner can get to prove it is valid when he goes to court.
    In the common case (trivial and bogus patents), the failure of the patent-office to deny them would not hurt the defendant.

    In general, however, I think that the entire patent system is worse than useless, and we should simply abolish "intellectual monopolies".

    To address your point, many people have the mis-perception that patents help small inventors. This isn't true. Small inventors are far likely to be harmed by the predatory actions of a large company (which uses its own patents to crush the small guy) than they are likely to be protected. To put it another way, If I have an idea, I want the right to use it. Patents give me the right (which I don't want) to destroy your business; they also cause me the risk (which I greatly fear) that someone else wilI come along and destroy mine.


"Well, it don't make the sun shine, but at least it don't deepen the shit." -- Straiter Empy, in _Riddley_Walker_ by Russell Hoban