561 Reply

Discussion Thread 2: Intellectual Property Litigation

Edel Mark I. Villaespin

Liberty University: BUS 561

Olugbenga Sopeju

Intellectual Property Litigation (Samsung vs. Apple)

The two biggest rivals, Samsung and Apple, has competed at each other in dominating the smartphone market for almost a decade in the electronics industry. As with any company with new development products, any firm is willing to protect their intellectual property because it ties to the company's profits, reputation, and business success. With the case between Apple and Samsung, it is one of the example circumstances that companies try to sue each other for stealing ideas or design bases based on intellectual property or patents (Kubasek, Browne, Barkacs, Herron, & Dhooge, 2016).

Intellectual property (IP)

Technology companies should able to receive some protection for a patent for any new technologies that include product design and its functionalities. As indicated by (Maskus, 2000), "intellectual property rights (IPRs) provide the foundation for building and extending markets for new technologies" (ix). However, even a company that applies for a patent cannot guarantee that it can protect the firm from intrusion or its product ideas are stolen from a rival company. There are main four areas of intellectual property that are used today by many companies. These types of intellectual property include trade secret, trademarks, copyrights, and patents. Companies and their leadership staff should be aware of these types of areas of intellectual properties to protect their business asset and products better. Overall, companies should able to receive protection for their ideas such as product design, shape, and color because it's part of the company's signature brand which falls under the intellectual property of trademark (Kubasek et al., 2016; Maskus, 2000). 

When competitors such as Apple and Samsung battled each other for litigation of intellectual theft, consumers do feel the pressure of the lawsuit. Usually, product price changes and production halt will ensue, primarily if the company is found at fault. This will affect many consumers because some items or products they want will not be available. According to Donohue (2014), "IP has an enormous effect on our economy. IP-intensive industries account for 38% of total U.S. GDP, support 40 million American jobs, and drive 60% of U.S. exports" (4th para.). Intellectual property is crucial to consumer safety because it prevents dangerous products such as counterfeit drugs or toys sold to the public. Besides, IP set the standard and regulates the majority of the companies and the whole commerce sector (Donohue, 2014).

The balance between business needs and customers' needs

Companies should balance their business needs and the needs of their customers. If the company only wanted more profits for their business than consumer care, then that is the best way of losing more loyal customers. Market analyst proved that the company who cares and caters about their clients' needs has always been successful in the business arena. Safety concern for a consumer should be the number one priority. Not only it is the ethical way, but it will boost the company's reputation. However, companies should research more of what services they can deliver and afford for a return of an investment before promising and catering the consumer of its exclusive products and services. 

As a company that creates products for people whose lives is at stake, their primary mission is to help people and save lives. Part of the mission statement for that company is a safety concern for consumers. However, certain individual companies are always driven for profits and could care less about the consumer. With intellectual property regulations, it plays a crucial role in protecting consumers from any possible harmful goods such as counterfeit pharmaceutical products. As Donohue (2014) noted, "IP is an incentive for innovations that enhance and improve our lives" and "critical to public safety and consumer confidence" (para. 2-3).

Additionally, IP protects all the investors and shareholders for the company. Without IP protection, the company will lose all the profits. Most likely, it will not be useful in the business arena because investors will lose the majority of their stake and investments (Donohue, 2014; Maskus, 2000). 

Biblical Worldview

As a business owner guided by the Biblical worldview, I would make sure to research all the fundamentals of intellectual property. As stated prior, intellectual property rights consist of patents, copyright, industrial design rights, plant varieties, trademarks, trade dress, and trade secrets (Burroughs, 2012; Donohue, 2014; Kubasek et al., 2016; Maskus, 2000). To protect these rights, lawmakers have to pass intellectual property laws which govern the companies in the business arena. The primary purpose of protecting intellectual property is to encourage creators and inventors to innovate new intellectual goods for consumers (Donohue, 2014). Lemley (2005) also indicated that "intellectual property protection in the United States has always been about generating incentives to create" (p. 1031). When new inventions and brand new products such as iPhones and smart TVs and smartwatches revolutionize the industry, more customers will flock and buy these products, which drives our leading economy (Donohue, 2014). 

Nonetheless, when the competition is close, companies will do anything to maximize its return of investment (ROI) and profits. Sometimes, part of it is neglecting ethical principles. Companies will lie, cheat, and steal just to be in the top against its business competitors. In the Bible, one of the commandments is "You shall not steal" (Exodus 20:15, ESV). If companies are caught stealing IPs, then they can expect the repercussions. Usually, costly financial payments or penalties and litigations will take place. The majority of companies that faces massive lawsuits will usually file for bankruptcy. As stated in 1 Timothy 6:10, "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs" (ESV). In sum, it is not worth to steal and use someone else IPs as it creates an ethical dilemma and is protected by our current governing laws and business regulations internationally. 

 

Reference

Burroughs, A. (2012). "How ignoring intellectual property rights can hurt your business." Smart Business. Retrieved from  http://www.sbonline.com/article/how-ignoring-intellectual-property-rights-can-hurt-your-business-stradling/

Donohue, T. (2014). "Intellectual Property Has Huge Impact on Society." U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Retrieved from  https://www.uschamber.com/above-the-fold-/intellectual-property-has-huge-impact-society

Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Barkacs, L., Herron, D., & Dhooge, L. (2016). Biblical worldview edition of dynamic business law. N. J. Kippenhan (Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Education.

Lemley, M. A. (2004). Property, intellectual property, and free riding. Tex L. Rev., 83, 1031.

Maskus, K. E. (2000). Intellectual property rights in the global economy. Peterson Institute. Retrieved from  https://books.google.com/books ?id=bmbxxau6_rUC&lpg =PR9&ots=d W6FDUL6SB&dq=intellectual%20property&lr&pg=PA2#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Jhunaiah Bryant

BUSI 561

DB Forum 2

Liberty University

 

 

Apple and Samsung have occupied with a longstanding fight in court over licenses and trademarks that made the two innovation monster organizations record claims against one another in courts around the world. The fights between these two mammoths started in 2011 when Apple sued Samsung for patent encroachment asserting that Samsung android telephone and tablets that incorporated the Nexus S, Universe S4G, Samsung Galaxy tab and Epic 4G had encroached on Apple's protected innovation. In light of this situation, one would contend that is reasonable for state that "for a business to ensure his licensed innovation, it must know about and work inside the limits of the law for each sort of property" (Kubasek et al, p. 170). In this dialog, we will dissect the cases and counterclaims made in claims documented by Apple CEO Tim cook and Samsung Major Domo Gee- Sung Choi in the United States wherein every one of these two organizations keep up its scholarly property has been encroached upon.

Apple global Litigation over innovation patent ended up known as a feature of the portable gadget, "Award Smart Phones Wars" (Kurt, E., 2014). For quite a long time Apple and Samsung have been in fight on a scale practically remarkable in late business history. These legitimate wars are said to have cost the two organizations in excess of a billion dollars and spreading over more than four landmasses and a few nations; including Germany, Japan, South Korea, Australia, France and Haiti, Dutch, what's more, British and US courts. Everything began when the undertaking that made the iPhone that late Steve Occupation's "textured when Samsung – Apple greatest provider drew out a shockingly comparative gadget four days preceding the acquaintance of iPhone with the world, Apple was compelled to record suits of four structures licenses covering the fundamental state of the iPhone" (Kurt, E. 2014) finished up. These were likewise pursued with various filling of shading configuration patent covering 193 screen shots of different iPhone graphical UIs. Samsung did not yield as they excessively had declared a few

of its licenses against Apple, including a patent covering the capacity of photographs from a camera telephone" (Kubasek et al, 2016, p. 160). Luckily, the preliminary decision was supportive of Apple.

The decision found that Samsung persistently encroached on Apple's structure and the utility licenses and furthermore weakened Apple's exchange dress I association with iPhone, and Apple was granted $1.049 billion in harms by the Jury while Samsung had zero harms in its counter suit. "Apple may win the fight yet at the same time lose the war" (Kurt, E. 2014). A benefit arranged organization ought to guarantee to offset its need with the necessities of the clients by making a point to put resources into the future on the off chance that they and comprehend the client's needs. The worth that a organization brings ought to be estimated in transient objectives or benefits, yet as far as supportability that would return long haul results or benefits" Kanter, R. 2011). Having continued rehash clients show reliability, and this I turn ensures benefit.

Each organization or business has an obligation towards its clients more than themselves. At the absolute starting point, "Steve Jobs and its board administrators helped formed Apple into an imaginative structure and front-line organization which has given an incredible qualification to make" (Griffin, M. 2015). Prior, Apple PC got a system for its store structure, the shape, what's more, area of the tables showing the items and why the trademark was significant for apple is because of the supposed phony Apple stores in china that mistook the clients for the genuine Apple store and items. (Kubasek, et al, 2016, p. 160). It is legitimate that licenses permit organizations to charge whatever the market bears base upon their restrictive items.

In the event that I were a CEO of both of the two tech mammoths, I would proffer to discourse between my organization plan makers and my organization attorneys and my rival's to have the option to draw a line of contrast and refinement of our structure product(s) versus their plan items, in accordance with all appropriate laws that oversees licenses and trademarks lastly put a conclusion to our disparities or questions. This methodology would enable my organization to concentrate on what's most essential to us and keep on making intriguing shopper items which we are known for and disparaged. This settlement may accompany some trade off and some structure settlements that would empower the two organizations to push ahead. (Phillip, A. 2010). "I have battled a decent battle I have wrapped up the race, I have kept the confidence" (Timothy 4:7).

Creator versus Consumer in the creation and the executives of protected innovation that originates from imagination additionally accompanies a heap of sticks, both for the maker of the property and for network. (Kubasek, et al, 2016, p. 170). The measure and enormity of an organization is the capacity to think diversely and Globalization is an impetus for fast change. What's more, these inquiries come directly through, "For what reason be a famous client's maker when you can essentially be a symbol? For what reason be a constructing agent when you can be a financial speculator behind the next innovation wave? Therefore, Samsung and Foxconn by chance had a similar vision to push and propel themselves up the worth chain and become the brand where they could understand more noteworthy edge returns which is absolutely what they did" (Griffin, M. 2017).

The law is the last authority particularly when two gatherings have a question. To counteract encroachment of trademarks and licenses to enable the procedure of creation to run easily, lawful activities are regularly required. There are laws that administer every property type like; trademark. This is an unmistakable imprint, word, or plan which makers use to distinguish their one of a kind structure. Copyrights secures the outflow of imaginative thoughts. While licenses ensure process and developments. While Trade mystery is a procedure, item, strategy for task. (Kubasek, et al, 2016, p. 170-180).

Taking everything into account, it was the expectation and reasoning recently Steve Jobs to consistently pursue his own sound judgment and advices about perceiving at whatever point the time had come to proceed onward, rather than taking a gander at the earth he deserted brimming with suits. What's more, he said the accompanying words "I have looked in the morrow each morning and asked myself: If today were my last day of my life, will I need to do what I'm going to do today? He said during an initiation discourse he gave at Stanford University 2005, "And at whatever point the appropriate response has been 'no' for such a large number of days straight, I realize I have to change something" (Jobs, S. 2005).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Griffin, M. (2015) Disruption, Innovation, and Reinventing Business. Retrieved from    

http://www.cio/com/article/2926435/innovation/how-apples-  outsourcingstrategy-vreated-two-

giant-competitors.html.

Kurt, E. (2014). The Great Smartphone War.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news.business/2014/06/apple-samsung-smartphone-  patent-war

Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Barkacs, L., Herron, D., & Dhooge, L.

(2016). Biblical worldview edition of dynamic business law. N. J. Kippenhan (Ed.). New York,

NY: McGraw Hill Education.

Philipp, A. (2010). Apple, Samsung CEOs to negotiate patent dispute. Retrieved from

        http://www.pcworld.com/article255860/apple_samsung_ceos_to_negotiate_patent_dispute.html