LG Seeks Sales Ban of Samsung Galaxy Tablet In Korea

Dupple writes "According to the Dow Jones News Wires, LG has filed an injunction in its home territory of South Korea, seeking to ban the sale of the Galaxy Note 10.1, alleging the panels inside the tablet infringe LG patents. The injunction follows a lawsuit filed by Samsung on 7 December, which alleged that LG infringed seven of Samsung's liquid crystal display patents. LG, which filed the injunction with the Seoul District Court on Wednesday, is aiming to block the sales of the Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet computer."

Comments

the end of civilization

[someone1234]

I think this will be the end of civilization. Lawyers don't produce anything useful, so when production stops, the civilization will collapse.

Re:the end of civilization

[wvmarle]

Well, the blanket "lawyers don't produce anything useful" I really don't agree with. Sure there is a lot of bullshit going on (those medical and "you didn't prevent me from doing something totally stupid and now my ego is hurt" claim suits in the US are likely far more damaging and costly than all the patent wars all over the world together), it is the rule of law - and the related work of lawyers - that gives us the overall well regulated society we live in.

Have no lawyers, and with that no proper access to law and legislation for anyone (companies and individuals alike) and yes, the world as we know it will collapse. Wonder how such a world looks like? Try looking at Somalia, for example.

Re:the end of civilization

[Anonymous Coward]

Have to chime in and agree. Lawyers are like access proxies. They get asked to file suits, to draft legislation, to represent the interests of clients. Lawyers don't do anything for themselves, they always have a client who wants that thing done.

That is why I boggle when people say "bloodsucking lawyers". If nobody wants a lawyer, don't hire one. Really what they are saying is "I hate the legal system when I am on the receiving end of it". The lawyers help you get what you want. Just try starting your own corporation, or enforcing a copyright.

Re:the end of civilization

[mwvdlee]

Lawyers aren't naturally bad, it's just that we've made it too easy for them to be bad.
Give a lawyer a broken patent system, and broken lawsuits will happen.

Re:the end of civilization

[rseuhs]

In theory you are correct, but there are diminishing returns the more you have of anything. Frivolous lawsuits are caused by lawyers who have otherwise nothing to do, in other words, there are just too many of them.

One reason for that is also overcomplicated and numerous laws, which were created mostly by - lawyers.

Re:the end of civilization

[devent]

How about having the laws written in such a way that any common man, who is not intellectual limited, lets say passes the grade school, can understand and apply?

How about we not have 500 sites of law that every citizen in theory must follow and should apply (the citizen law book (BGB) in Germany have 407 pages)? How about 100 pages or 50 pages?

How about we make lawyers nonprofit profession and law firms a public utility, that are required by law to offer anyone help regardless if the client can pay or not?

Lawyers are a by-product of civilization. Just like house maids, butlers. In theory you can clean your own stuff, or open your own door. Just like in theory you should be able to defend yourself in court without to tie your savings money directly to the success of the case. But if you make the apparatus of the door complicated enough that you can't open the door yourself without the help of a specialized server, then yes you "need" a butler.

Re:the end of civilization

[knarf]

Somalia is what you end up with in the absence of a functional criminal justice system. It is there that lawyers do the 'good' work - apart from the sleezebags which get off clearly guilty crooks on technicalities of course. Civil justice on the other hand is where the real vermin amongst lawyers can be found. From ambulance chasers to patent troll scum, take your pick.

A society without a functional civil justice system would end up somewhat unbalanced, but it would be no Somalia. As to whether it would be preferable over the current situation is debatable - probably the excesses are still outweighed by the benefits.

Re: the end of civilization

[Anonymous Coward]

Lawyers don't do anything for themselves, they always have a client who wants that thing done.

Hit men have the same excuse. It's a shame none of them are allowed to say "no".

Re:the end of civilization

[terec]

They get asked to file suits, to draft legislation, to represent the interests of clients.

Well, one actual problem with lawyers is that they have written legislation to benefit their own profession (not surprising), and that they have created steep barriers to entry. That's what people really should be complaining about: licensing requirements and the high proportion of lawyers in legislatures.

Re:the end of civilization

[LordLucless]

Legislation and law are created by politicians (who, it's true, are often trained in the law) rather than practising lawyers. The fact that one needs access to a solicitor to get legal work done is, in my opinion, a failing of the system and not a feature - it means that the richer you are, the lower the barrier of entry to legal access, which creates a divide between the ability of rich and poor to access law, which should be a universal leveller. The fact that we need a trained legalist to act as a proxy between us and the law shows the truth of what James Madison said:

It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what it will be tomorrow.

You are probably under the rule of more laws than you can possibly read in your lifetime. The laws are often so complex and couched in jargon that they are incomprehensible to most lay people. And the common law system means that the law is in a constant state of flux, as precedent is continually set all over the country.

Have no lawyers, and with that no proper access to law and legislation for anyone (companies and individuals alike) and yes, the world as we know it will collapse. Wonder how such a world looks like? Try looking at Somalia, for example.

Somalia isn't an example of a country without lawyers; it's a country without legislators with sufficient power to enforce the laws they enact.

Re:the end of civilization

[circletimessquare]

the one good thing about lawyers is that they replace violence

don't get me wrong, i hate the intellectual property mess

but at least this bullshit is playing out in boring courtrooms voluntarily by sweaty guys in overcompensating suits

rather than by kids handed an implement of death and pointed at each other, too young and too stupid to know they are wasting their lives on bullshit, as it has been in centuries past

Re:the end of civilization

[thetoadwarrior]

Lawyers invent ways for people to need lawyers. That is why they're a cancer on society. Most people shouldn't need lawyers that often and they certainly shouldn't be as ingrained into our society as they are.

Re: the end of civilization

[BrokenHalo]

Anyway, who says lawyers don't produce anything useful? One can always use hot air to float a balloon, and bullshit is useful for growing vegetables.

Re:the end of civilization

[Anonymous Coward]

>That is why I boggle when people say "bloodsucking lawyers"

Who comes up with the LAWS then? Let me guess, average joe plumber?

As one example, the whole patent fiasco is one big self licking ice-cream for which industry? .... oh yeah, the LEGAL one... you know, run by ... LAWYERS ... FOR LAWYERS.

Re:the end of civilization

[terec]

The US has one of the highes proportions of lawyers per capita, with about 300 lawyers per hundred thousand, compared with Japan's seven. Even Britain only has a third as many lawyers.

Yes, my country has a smaller proportion of lawyers too, than either the US or the UK (which is where you seem to be from). It sucks. It means that if you need legal representation for anything, a contract drawn, or get a copyright infringement letter in the mail, it's hard to find anybody competent willing to represent you. The only people who can afford lawyers are the wealthy and big corporations, and they use their legal staff to walk all over people.

Those lawyers need employment, preferably high paid, and will encourage litigation.

You don't seem to understand the law of supply and demand. Prices for lawyers are high because there is a high demand for them and little supply. That's no accident, unlike you, they do actually understand basic economics.

And when prices are high, it means only people with money can afford services, which also means that people with little money have no way of defending themselves.

Re:the end of civilization

[Nerdfest]

... or let lawyers create a patent system ...

The more, the merrier

[c0lo]

Re. patents, we reached as point in which it needs to get worse in order to get better.

Map?

[Flitcraft]

If someone drew a map of who sues who in the tech industry, what would it look like? Solid color? Blasphemous word?

Re:Map?

[PartyBoy!911]

An older one from end of januari 2012

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399098,00.asp

Judgment of Solomon needed.

[wvmarle]

With all those companies suing and countersuing each other, what we really need is a judge that says "now all of you go sit around the table and settle your patent disputes, and let me know the result when you're done. And until you're finished, none of you is allowed to sell any of your tablets or smart phones in this jurisdiction.

"Patent claimants that do not have products on the market at this moment may join the negotiations, and will anyway be bound to the final agreement of all parties."

That should settle it once and for all. And the rest of the world can go on with their lives. The most likely outcome of those negotiations is an agreement between all those parties to not sue each other over current or future patents any more - it's basically the only option in such a situation.

Re:Judgment of Solomon needed.

[wvmarle]

I'm sure an actual judge can come up with a much better and more inclusive way than I could come up in the minute or so it took me to write that comment.

And the disease is not that easy to cure. A good starting point would be to kill off software and business method patents (things that were never meant to be patentable when the patent was invented), yet from the glance of it, it won't work here, as the cases mentioned in the summary have to do with actual physical inventions, which patents are supposed to cover.

Oh and these "rounded corners" patents that are design patents. Those overall also work wonders. Which basically means "you can't make something that looks exactly like my product", which is totally sensible, as there is no good reason why Samsung should be allowed to sell a phone that looks exactly like the iPhone (which is way more than just "rectangle with rounded corners").

Re:Judgment of Solomon needed.

[Anonymous Coward]

The most likely outcome of those negotiations is an agreement between all those parties to not sue each other over current or future patents any more - it's basically the only option in such a situation.

Not a chance. The inevitable outcome is that the minor players - whose approval, by your rules, is required for any solution to go forward - would demand that the major players give them a lump of cash before the matter is considered settled. Since there are lots of minor players, and whoever holds out the longest has the best negotiating position to extort money from the major players, you'll be waiting a long time.

The simple solution is to say "All patents in this field are now void, and no new ones will be approved. In five years, we'll take another look at the industry, and figure out whether patents increased or decreased innovation before we decide whether to reintroduce them.".

Re:Judgment of Solomon needed.

[BrokenHalo]

...there is no good reason why Samsung should be allowed to sell a phone that looks exactly like the iPhone (which is way more than just "rectangle with rounded corners"

Really? OK, you're right. Samsung should make their phones bright pink. And patent that.

Seriously, though, how different does Samsung's phone need to be to not infringe on a totally and stupidly obvious patent? Maybe shape it like a pretzel?

Oh this is interesting!

[thegarbz]

The Galaxy Note 10.1 has a Plane-Line Switching (PLS) panel. This panel type was designed by Samsung specifically to not have to pay royalties to LG for their In-Plane Switching (IPS) patents.

These two display technologies have found their place in pretty much any screen with wide viewing areas (nearly all high end smartphones, tablets, and high end computer displays). I'll be interested to see what the outcome of this lawsuit may have on Samsung's display manufacturing business as all their high-end displays have PLS panels. With any luck it'll kill it off and they can start pushing for AMOLED panels in desktop displays.

Re:Good luck fighting Samsung in Korea

[93 Escort Wagon]

I mean, they love their corporations in general, but for Samsung it's another level of affection.

You might want to look up where LG is based...

You are the reason we need lawyers

[SmallFurryCreature]

So you want clear but short laws. That isn't possible, to make things clear legally so laws are not open to interpretation they need to be detailed and takes a lot of text.

Thou shalt not kill. That is easy. No exceptions, no moderation, thou shalt not kill, so if you do, you break the law and must be fully punished. Anything from euthanisia, to drink driver killing to murder spree, the same thing. Simple.

oh, you want degrees of homicide. Sorry, that is extra pages of text.

You want all the laws reduced to a hundred pages? Sharia law is nice and short, why don't you go life in a Sharia country.

On the whole, the larger the law books the more pleasant a place is to live in as shown by migration routes. Nobody wants to live in lawless places. Proof me wrong, EMIGRATE.

Re:You are the reason we need lawyers

[dkf]

So you want clear but short laws. That isn't possible, to make things clear legally so laws are not open to interpretation they need to be detailed and takes a lot of text.

Of you can simply say that you are OK with leaving things open to interpretation. Then you've either got a lot of arbitrary decisions, or you need a system (such as common law) to constrain courts to be both self-consistent and consistent with the decisions of superior courts. At which point the effective law balloons...

This is getting ridiculous

[CuteSteveJobs]

We've reached the point where no one can do anything without violating someone elses patents. At the multinational corporations this has produced a ridiculous deadlock where no one can sell anything. I propose we (i) dismantle the patent system, (ii) throw out any congressman who stands in our way and (iii) finally turn the USPTO staff and patent laywers into soylnet green.

Re:Good luck fighting Samsung in Korea

[Swampash]

They feel a lot of affection for "Lucky Goldstar" too.

Hell that's a company name that only a Korean could love.