As we all know, on January 11, 2018, Huawei sent a public verdict to the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court v. Samsung IPR infringement cases. The court ruled that Samsung immediately stopped manufacturing, sales, and promised sales to infringe on Huawei's patents. Huawei First instance wins. If you do not accept this judgment, Samsung can appeal according to law.
Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court pointed out in the judgment that, considering the fact that the patent in this case is a 4G standard patent, it is different from the non-standard essential patent in stopping the infringement. After the court ordered the defendant to assume the verdict of stopping the infringement, Huawei and Samsung still It is possible to negotiate cross-licensing of standard and necessary patents. If Huawei and Samsung have reached the standard patent cross-licensing agreement or agreed by Huawei, they will not be allowed to execute the court's decision to stop the infringement.
However, the recent ruling of a judge in the United States added a few variables to the incident. US District Court Judge William H. Orrick ruled that Samsung Electronics can continue to manufacture and sell smart phones in China.
Orrick said that both Huawei and Samsung have a lawsuit in San Francisco. Before the San Francisco court made a judgment, the Shenzhen Intermediate Court’s ruling could not take effect.
Orik said in the award: 'The previous ruling of the Chinese court would make meaningless the 'violation of the contract' currently being conducted in the San Francisco court. During this period, it would pose a great risk to Samsung's operation in the Chinese market. . '
In response, Huawei J. Bettinger, a lawyer in San Francisco, has not responded yet.
2. The Ministry of Commerce reviews the anti-dumping measures applicable to electrolytic capacitor paper imported from Japan;
Original Title: The Ministry of Commerce will conduct a final review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan.
According to the micro-network news, today's Ministry of Commerce issued an announcement stating that the anti-dumping measures applicable to imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan are to be re-assessed. The contents of the review investigation are as follows: If the termination of the import of the product originating in Japan Whether the anti-dumping measures implemented by electrolytic capacitor paper may lead to the continuance or recurrence of dumping and damage.
It is understood that on April 17, 2007, the Ministry of Commerce decided to implement the final anti-dumping measures on imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan. The implementation period is five years from April 18, 2007; April 18, 2013, Business The Ministry decided to continue to implement the final anti-dumping measures on imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan. The implementation period is five years from April 18, 2013.
On January 29, 2018, the Ministry of Commerce received an application for the final review of the anti-dumping measures submitted by Zhejiang Kain Special Material Co., Ltd. on behalf of the domestic electrolytic capacitor paper industry. The applicant claimed that if the anti-dumping measures were terminated, the products would be imported from Japan. The dumping of electrolytic capacitor paper may continue or reoccur, and damage to the electrolytic capacitor paper industry in China may continue or occur again. The Ministry of Commerce is requested to rule on maintaining anti-dumping measures against imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan.
The following is the original announcement of the Ministry of Commerce:
On April 17, 2007, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the 30th bulletin of 2007, which decided to implement the final anti-dumping measures on imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan. The implementation period is five years from April 18, 2007. 2013 4 On the 18th of the month, the Ministry of Commerce issued Notice No. 19 of 2013, which decided to continue to implement the final anti-dumping measures on imported electrolytic capacitor paper originally produced in Japan. The implementation period is five years from April 18, 2013.
On January 29, 2018, the Ministry of Commerce received an application for the final review of the anti-dumping measures submitted by Zhejiang Kain Special Materials Co., Ltd. on behalf of the domestic electrolytic capacitor paper industry. The applicant claimed that if the anti-dumping measures were terminated, the products would be imported from Japan. The dumping of electrolytic capacitor paper may continue or reoccur, and damage to the electrolytic capacitor paper industry in China may continue or occur again. The Ministry of Commerce is requested to rule on maintaining anti-dumping measures against imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan.
In accordance with the relevant provisions of the “Anti-Dumping Regulations of the People's Republic of China”, the Ministry of Commerce has the qualifications of the applicant, the circumstances of the investigated product and similar products in China, the import status of the investigated product during the implementation of anti-dumping measures, the possibility of dumping continuing or recurring, and the damage continues or The possibility of recurrence and related evidence were reviewed. The available evidence shows that the applicant meets the requirements of Article 11, Article 13 and Article 17 of the “Anti-Dumping Regulations of the People's Republic of China” on industry and industry representativeness. , Eligible to apply on behalf of the Chinese electrolytic capacitor paper industry. The investigation authority believes that the applicant’s claims and the prima facie evidence submitted meet the requirements for final review.
According to Article 48 of the Anti-dumping Regulations of the People's Republic of China, the Ministry of Commerce decided to conduct an interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan starting April 18, 2018. The relevant matters are announced as follows:
I. Continue to implement anti-dumping measures According to the proposal of the Ministry of Commerce, the Customs Tariff Commission of the State Council decided that during the period of final review and investigation of anti-dumping measures, the imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan shall continue to be in accordance with the 30th Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China in 2007 and the 19th in 2013. The scope and rate of taxation announced in the announcement are levied against anti-dumping duties.
Second, the review investigation period The dumping investigation period for this review was from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. The industrial damage investigation period was from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017.
Third, review the product scope of the review The scope of review of the product is the product to which the original anti-dumping measures apply. It is in line with the product scope of the Ministry of Commerce's No. 30 of 2007 and No. 19 of 2013.
IV. Review Content The content of the review investigation is: If the termination of the anti-dumping measures imposed on imported electrolytic capacitor paper originating in Japan, it may lead to the continuance or recurrence of dumping and damage.
5. The interested party participating in the investigation and registration may register with the Trade Remedy and Investigation Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce to participate in the review of the anti-dumping investigation within 20 days from the date of this announcement. The interested party participating in the investigation shall be based on the "Format" provides basic information, the quantity and amount of products exported to or imported from China during the dumping investigation period, the quantities and amounts of similar products produced and sold, and the related information. "Reference Format for Registered Participation Survey" can be used in business Department website Trade Remedy and Investigation Bureau website (http://trb.mofcom.gov.cn) Download.
The interested parties referred to in this announcement are the individuals and organizations stipulated in Article 19 of the Anti-dumping Regulations of the People's Republic of China.
VI. During the process of accessing the open information survey, the interested party can consult the application submitted by the applicant in this case and the catalogue of the public information of the case through the aforementioned website, or search the Trade Remedy Public Information Office of the Ministry of Commerce (tel: 0086-10-65197859). , Read, copy and copy the public information of the case.
VII. Comments on the case The interested party may comment on the product range and product classification of the survey, the eligibility of the applicant, the country (region) under investigation, and other related issues, and may publish it within 20 days from the date of release of this announcement. Written opinions are submitted to the Trade Remedy and Investigation Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce.
VIII. Investigation Methods According to the provisions of Article 20 of the Anti-dumping Regulations of the People's Republic of China, the Ministry of Commerce may use questionnaires, samples, hearings, on-site inspections, etc. to obtain information from relevant stakeholders and conduct investigations.
In order to obtain the information needed for the investigation, the Ministry of Commerce usually issues survey questionnaires to registered foreign exporters or manufacturers, domestic producers and domestic importers within 10 working days from the date of registration registration as specified in this announcement. , The Ministry of Commerce will post a questionnaire on the aforementioned website.
Other interested parties who have not participated in the investigation and registration can download it directly from the aforementioned website, or obtain a questionnaire from the Trade Remedy and Investigation Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce and fill in the report as required.
All companies should submit complete and accurate answer sheets within the time specified by the Ministry of Commerce. The answer sheet should include all the information required by the questionnaire.
IX. Confidentiality information submission and processing Interests To the information submitted by the Ministry of Commerce, if confidentiality is required, the Ministry of Commerce may submit a request for confidentiality processing of related information and explain the reasons, and shall also provide a non-confidential summary of the confidential information. Non-confidential summaries should contain sufficient and meaningful information so that other stakeholders can have a reasonable understanding of confidential information. If non-confidential summaries cannot be provided, reasons should be given. If the information submitted by stakeholders does not indicate the need for confidentiality , The Ministry of Commerce will regard this information as public information.
X. Consequences of non-cooperation In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of the Anti-dumping Regulations of the People's Republic of China, when the Ministry of Commerce conducts an investigation, the interested parties shall truthfully report the situation and provide relevant information. The interested parties do not report the situation truthfully and provide relevant information. Where information, or failure to provide necessary information within a reasonable period of time, or otherwise seriously impedes the investigation, the Ministry of Commerce may make a ruling based on the facts already obtained and the best information available.
XI. Duration of the survey The survey started on April 18, 2018 and usually ends before April 17, 2019.
3. OPPO and Corephotonics have signed a strategic licensing agreement for the next generation of mobile phone cameras;
Gathering Microblog news, April 17, the world's fourth-largest smartphone maker OPPO and the dual photo technology leading licensee Corephotonics signed a strategic licensing agreement. According to the agreement, OPPO will cooperate with Corephotonics to develop its smartphone camera roadmap - Support High optical zoom factors, accurate depth mapping, advanced features such as ultra-fast digital background blur, covering innovations in optics, mechanics, computational photography, deep learning, etc.
Dr. King of Oppo hardware director said: “Mobile photography is the focus of OPPO. We are always eager to establish a solid partnership with leading suppliers such as Corephotonics. Corephotonics is equipped with dual camera with wide-angle and telephoto lens, with periscope structure, optical image Stabilization and image fusion technology make mobile photography closer to the performance of digital cameras. '
Prof. David Mendlovic, CEO of Corephotonics, stated: 'The OPPO's innovations in the field of smartphone imaging are impressive. We are proud to work with the OPPO team to develop next-generation camera technology. This strategic agreement is a strong testament to our camera design and Imaging algorithms are bound to benefit the future of mobile photography.
4.Samsung foldable tablet patent exposure Expanded area multiplied;
Although Samsung's sales in China are not as good as before, it is undeniable that its technical accumulation is still very rich.
5. Google is being investigated by the Korean Anti-Monopoly: Force the game to open its own store;
Google has become the world’s largest web search service provider and mobile phone operating system developer. In many countries, the government has launched a variety of anti-monopoly investigations against Google. According to foreign media’s latest news, the Korean government has launched an anti-Google anti- Monopoly investigation, reason is that Google pressures mobile phone software developers to require them to upload to Google's own software store.
According to an industry source quoted by the Korean Herald’s website, the Korean Fair Trade Commission (FTC) has already started the above investigation. The survey object is Google’s Play software store.
FTC began to understand whether the mobile game development companies in Korea are under pressure from Google, especially 'Please release games on specific platforms', 'Do not publish games in other software stores'.
According to reports, the focus of the FTC's investigation is that if Korean mobile software companies do not meet Google's requirements for uploading to their own stores, they will face any adverse impact.
Previously, such allegations have emerged in the South Korean internet industry, indicating that Google is putting pressure on them to upload games to the Google Store rather than competitors' stores.
In South Korea, Android developed by Google accounted for 90% of the market share, so in the software store market, Google Store also has a dominant influence.
According to a report released by the Korea Mobile Internet Enterprise Association last month, Google Play Store accounted for 60.7% of the sales volume of mobile phone software in South Korea last year. In the sales of software, the game accounted for the largest proportion.
In contrast, Apple's App Store software store accounted for 24.5% of the total. In addition, One Store, a software store operated by the three South Korean telecommunications companies and the portal Naver, accounted for 11.6% of the total.
According to reports, last year, several popular games in South Korea, namely NCSoft's "Lineage M" and Netmarble's "Lineage 2 Revolution" appeared only in Google and Apple's software stores, and did not appear in the third-ranked Korea mentioned above. Local software store.
In addition, even if some mobile games began to be sold on the One Store, the same games had already been on Google and Apple's stores for a long time, which naturally affected the sales revenue of this local store.
For the South Korean government’s report on the anti-monopoly investigation of Google’s software store, Google has not commented yet.
It is reported that this is not the first time that the Korean government has launched an anti-monopoly investigation against Google. In 2016, the South Korean government investigated whether Google had conducted unfair competition on mobile operating systems. According to industry sources, Google had forced some South Korean mobile phone manufacturers to use Android. System, Do not use a competitor's operating system.
In the European Union, Google was met with three antitrust investigations. Among the investigations concerning the purchase of goods, Google received a huge fine of more than two billion U.S. dollars. The European Union is still investigating whether Google’s Android system has unfairly competed against mobile phone manufacturers. For example, Google is forced to preinstall Google's software and services. In addition, Google has asked some media websites to use their services exclusively in the online advertising market.
The software store has become an important profit model for the mobile Internet industry. Operators such as Google Apple can get about 30% share of software downloads. In East Asia, such as China, mobile phone companies and telecom companies also run their own software stores. Therefore, software development The general choice is to upload software and games to multiple stores at the same time to maximize sales revenue. Tencent Technology
6. Shanghai accelerates its integration into the international patent system;
Shanghai Daily, April 17 (Reporter Jiang Yibing) On the 17th, the Shanghai Municipal Intellectual Property Joint Meeting Office and the Foreign Affairs Office of Shanghai Municipal People's Government jointly issued the “2017 Shanghai Intellectual Property White Paper.” Relevant data show that Shanghai is accelerating its integration into international patents. System, while high pressure severely infringement of intellectual property rights.
In 2017, the number of Shanghai PCT international patent applications was 2,100, an increase of 34.6% year-on-year. The PCT international patent application was when the applicant obtained patent protection for a patent cooperation treaty (PCT) contracting party in accordance with a prescribed procedure. Patent application filed by a patent administration of a State party. People’s Daily