Supreme Court Sides With Samsung In Apple Patent Damages Dispute

Utilitarianism

Discuss about the Samsung and Apple Patent Damages Dispute.

Ethical dilemma is defined as a situation in which a preference is required to be made between two options when none of the options is effective in resolving the situation (Widdershoven, Metselaar & Molewijk, 2016). The essay discusses “Supreme Court sides with Samsung in Apple patent damages dispute”.

In this assignment, the case study of “Supreme Court sides with Samsung in Apple patent damages dispute” is analyzed with the help of four classical ethical theories including utilitarianism, deontology, virtue and contract.

The scenario illustrates the case study, which reflects, “Supreme Court sides with Samsung in Apple patent damages dispute” (Balakrishnan, 2017).  It has been identified that the supreme court of U.S on Tuesday ruled for Samsung as it has copied various designs from Apple iPhone. In the year 2011, Apple charged Samsung for copying different features of Apple including its colorful grid of app icons. Two lower courts ruled on various design patent infringement of apple and as a result, Samsung paid $ 399 million for infringing the design of Apple. The figure was earned by Samsung from 11 Smartphone models. The penalty was charged according to some federal law, which states that a party that copies as well as applies patented design then they are liable to the total profit (Peters, 2015). 

However, Samsung countered that the money that is charged is very much disappropriate. The South Korean giant also added that apple is not entitled to the entire profit but to the profit that is gained due to infringing designs from Apple. The justice sent the case to the lower court for further different proceedings. The question that is raised before the Supreme Court is to calculate the amount Samsung needs to pay for copying (Balakrishnan, 2017). Apple discusses the fact with CNBC by illustrating that Apple will continue to protect their years of hard work for being in the same position. It is quite optimistic that the lower court will never send powerful signal that stealing someone else design is right.

Utilitarianism

The ethical theory of Utilitarianism helps in considering the actions as best if it is helpful in maximizing the utility of the actions (Peters, 2015).  As per the theory of Utilitarianism, it is analyzed that   Apple has charged Samsung for copying its design and filed a case against Samsung. The lower court asked Samsung to pay $ 399 million, which is collected from 11 Samsung Smartphone models. The action taken by the court is very much important as it helps in maximizing the utility of actions. The penalty, which was, accused on Samsung insights the negative impact of copying. Therefore, the action, which is taken by the court, does not allow Samsung to future copy any of the design from apple. It is also a lesson for all the organizations that copies designs from other companies (Sritharan et al., 2015). The scenario illustrated that copying is a crime and therefore it must be avoided otherwise the party which is accused of copying as well as applying the design will be liable to the total profit that is gained by the company.

Deontology

The ethical theory of deontology helps in reviewing the morality of an action, which is fully dependent on some specific rules (Jefferson, 2015).  The theory of deontology helps in analyzing the decision that is taking by the court. It is analyzed that in the perspective of Apple, the actions of court is moral because the court charges $399 to Samsung for copying various designs of Apple. The designs that are copied by Samsung includes colorful grid of app icons, which is illegal. One the other hand according to the perspective of Samsung the decision taken by the court is very disappropriate. This is because the court asked Samsung to pay $ 399, which is gained by Samsung after selling 11 Smartphone’s models. South Korean giant illustrated that Apple must not receive the entire income of Samsung but it is entitled only to the profit, which is gained from various components that infringe (Winters, 2015). However, apple receives the entire income that is gained by Samsung, which is considered illegal. However, the federal laws states that anyone who is copying as well as applying the patented design will be liable to provide his total profit which is gained.

Deontology

Virtue

The ethical theory of virtue helps in emphasizing the character of an individual as a key element of ethical thinking, which does not depend on the rules (Martinez & Wueste, 2016).  According to the theory of virtue, it is analyzed that the actions taken by the court is a key element of ethical thinking. The court identified that copying is crime and therefore it charges Samsung to pay $399 as it has copied various designs from the iPhone of Apple including the colorful grid of app icons. The decision of the court plays an important role in identifying the fact the actions of Samsung is an ethical issue and therefore strict rules and regulations are required in order to avoid it. The penalty, which is provided by Samsung, is dependent on the federal laws states that if an individual copies and applies design then the manufacturer is liable to the extent of the total profit gained (Lee, 2015).  The action that is taken by the court is considered ethical in the whole scenario, which is generally taken in order to resolve the issue associated with infringement.

Contract

The ethical theory of contract addresses various questions about the originality of the society as well as about the legitimacy of the authorities of the state (Mazzeo,  Hillel & Zyontz, 2013).  As per the theory of contract, the lower court penalized Samsung for its wrong actions. Apple sued Samsun that it has copied some of its design including the colorful grid of app icons, which is a crime. Therefore, Samsung was penalized and the court asked Samsung to pay $ 399, which is collected by the company by selling 11 other Smartphone designs. Samsung was penalized as per the federal laws (Brean, 2013).  The case was sent back to the lower court for its further proceedings. Now different types of questions arises before Supreme Court including the fact how it will calculate the amount, which Samsung has collected by infringing the designs of the Apple.

There are several recommendations that help in resolving the ethical issue, which is associated with Apple. The recommendations include:

Strict rules and policies: The government must implement some strict rules and policies for reducing the issues associated with patent infringement

Security and privacy: It is quite important to maintain proper privacy as well as security so that none of the information or features of the products are copied by some other company.

Training and development: The employees of Apple must implement various programs associated with training and development in order to provide proper authorization to the features.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that Samsung was penalized due to its actions of copying the patent designs of Apple’s iPhone. The actions taken by the court is considered ethical as copying is considered as a crime. The lower court asked Samsung to pay an amount of $ 399 for its immoral activities whereas in the perspective of Samsung the acquisition offered by the court is disappropriate. It is analyzed that the essay helps in providing several recommendations that are helpful in resolving the issues, which are associated with Samsung.

References

Balakrishnan, A. (2017). Supreme Court sides with Samsung in Apple patent damages dispute. CNBC. Retrieved 5 January 2017, from https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/06/supreme-court-rules-for-samsung-in-apple-patent-case.html

Brean, D. H. (2013). Asserting Patents to Combat Infringement via 3D Printing: It’s No’Use’. Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal, 23(3).

Jefferson, A. (2015). Torbjörn Tannsjö: Taking Life: Three Theories on the Ethics of Killing. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 1-2.

Lee, H. K. (2015). Between fan culture and copyright infringement: manga scanlation. Lee, H.–K.(2009) Between fan culture and copyright infringement: manga scanlation. Media, Culture & Society, 36(6), 1011-1022

Martinez, N., & Wueste, D. (2016). Balancing theory and practicality: engaging non-ethicists in ethical decision making related to radiological protection. Journal of Radiological Protection, 36(4), 832.

Mazzeo, M. J., Hillel, J., & Zyontz, S. (2013). Explaining the “unpredictable”: An empirical analysis of US patent infringement awards. International Review of Law and Economics, 35, 58-72 Lucas, K., Wee, B., & Maat, K. (2016). A method to evaluate equitable accessibility: combining ethical theories and accessibility-based approaches. Transportation, 43(3), 473-49

Peters, R. S. (2015). Psychology and Ethical Development (Routledge Revivals): A Collection of Articles on Psychological Theories, Ethical Development and Human Understanding. Routledge.

Sritharan, K., Wee, V. M. E., Chin, R. M. Y., & Jong, E. E. M. (2015). A case study: the knowledge and awareness levels of copyright infringement among learners utilising digital technologies in Sunway College Johor Bah

Widdershoven, G., Metselaar, S., & Molewijk, B. (2016). Ethical Theory as Part of Clinical Ethics Support Practice. The American Journal of Bioethics, 16(9), 34-36.

Winters, K. (2015). Good faith belief of patent invalidity not a valid defence to induced infringement. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, jpv131.