tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post5690583357757991335..comments2024-03-19T13:13:18.609+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Friday FripperyVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-14620155187999343322011-10-17T18:53:01.482+01:002011-10-17T18:53:01.482+01:00".. its prized injunction." No apostroph...".. its prized injunction." No apostrophe here, please!<br /><br /><i>DME</i>Department of Minuscule Emendationsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-75927057124751456172011-10-14T21:06:55.304+01:002011-10-14T21:06:55.304+01:00"What week would be complete without yet more..."What week would be complete without yet more thrilling news from the Apple / Samsung dispute? This week’s venue of choice is “down under”, "<br /><br />With also a decision delivered today by the Dutch patent court in the Hague.<br /><br />Samsung being denied preliminary injunctive relief as the judge considers that Samsung's position could in affirmative proceedings be considered to be abuse.<br /><br />This Kat lover fell of his chair reading this, remembering certain events and positions taken earlier by this Korean company - on which he cannot elaborate any further.<br />But if I would have told then that Samsung would be in the position it is now, nobody would have believed me.<br /><br />Interesting times. Will Samsung be the new Qualcomm with 5% licensing rates?<br /><br />And an issue at stake was the dilemma of essential or not:<br />- Defend your patent is essential to the standard. This makes your infringement defence rather easy, but binds you directly to nasty licensing obligations.<br />- Indicate that your patent is not essential and spend a lot of time on infringement defence - and be free to enforce your patent in any way you like, up to border detention of two million christmas presents at the port of Rotterdam and Heathrow airport.<br /><br />Interesting to see that the court also picks up the reference of Samsung to "Philips - SK Kassetten" - and that the court, with delivering that decision, also indicated that there is room for exceptions in special cases.<br /><br />Was that really the case or was that in particular to create an escape route in case Dutch pearl Philips would be at the other side?<br /><br />Anyway, this in my opinion directly kicks out the first three legs under the chair of jurisprudence of the Dutch patent court.<br /><br />More info in Dutch:<br />http://zoeken.rechtspraak.nl/detailpage.aspx?ljn=BT7610Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com