According to Beijing Evening News, according to a report from the Beijing Evening News, Ren Xiaoping and Sun Jie sued Apple Electronics Trading (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (abbreviated as Apple Electronics) and Apple Computer Trading (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (referred to as Apple Trading) for patents on lithium-ion battery capacity. The company) infringes on its patents for inventions, involving Apple's latest production and sales of iphone 7 mobile phones and iPad tablet computers.
It is reported that the plaintiff Ren Xiaoping and Sun Jie requested the court to order Apple to stop selling, promising to sell the infringing products 'iPhone7 (32G)' and 'iPad (WI-FI, 32G)' tablet computers that infringed the plaintiff’s patent rights, destroying all stocks. Infringement products, and require the joint compensation of plaintiff economic losses totaling RMB 1 million.
At present, the case has completed the delivery of the defendant and is still within the time limit for proof.
Ren Xiaoping, Sun Jie owns the invention patent titled 'secondary lithium ion battery or battery pack, its protection circuit and electronic device'. The two plaintiffs believe that the battery used in Apple products uses this patented technology to make the original battery. The shortcomings of poor battery life can be greatly improved. With the advantage of large battery capacity, it will be in a more favorable position in the market competition and bring higher profits to it. Therefore, it was sued to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court.
According to published data, the patent was published in April 2003. It mainly provides a new method for improving the capacity, average working voltage and specific energy of secondary lithium-ion batteries or batteries. By properly adjusting positive and negative materials according to theoretical capacity Calculating the ratio and appropriately increasing the charge limit voltage can substantially increase the specific energy and the average operating voltage of the secondary lithium ion battery without affecting the battery cycle performance. Meanwhile, the present invention also provides a secondary lithium ion battery or battery using the method. Group, protection circuit for the secondary lithium ion battery or battery pack, and an electronic device using the secondary lithium ion battery or battery pack using the protection circuit.
The plaintiffs Ren Xiaoping and Sun Jie believe that battery technology is the basic guarantee for large-screen smart phones to achieve various functions and is a technical bottleneck. The involved patents provide a novel and effective way to increase the specific energy of secondary lithium-ion batteries or battery packs. The method of average working voltage. This patent is the basic invention patent of the second generation high voltage lithium-ion battery, and it is the key basic patent of China's key industry. The patent of this patent has also been patented in the United States, Japan, and South Korea.
The Beijing Jingzhou Science and Technology Intellectual Property Judicial Identification Center identified the batteries used in the iPhone 7 and iPad tablets purchased by the plaintiff, and the battery protection circuit fell into the protection scope of the involved patents.
2. China's artificial intelligence patents remain hidden
The 2018 World Smart Conference closed on the 18th in the seaside city of Tianjin, and the thinking it left for the industry continues.
In the round-table dialogue session of the CXO Forum on the development of smart technology industry, Li Shipeng, the co-dean of the vice president of the HKUST’s vice president of technology, asked a question that was 'difficult to answer' and an unforgettable answer.
"Do you think that in all the artificial intelligence companies in China today, whether they are big companies or small companies, which one is the best?" Li Shipeng said that this question is to inspire everyone to think about the future development trend of artificial intelligence.
This is indeed a very difficult question to answer. In the past few years, artificial intelligence has become a mess. The artificial intelligence company that started in the early years has ushered in the spring, and new artificial intelligence startups are springing up. Internet companies such as BAT are beginning to vie Layout artificial intelligence business. It is not easy to pick the best from it.
Several guests at the stage contemplate the moment and begin to answer.
'The domestic artificial intelligence industry has developed some kings and leading companies so far. ' Mo Chi, founder and chief strategy officer of Netchie Tianyuan, mentioned several companies such as HKUST, Xiaomi and others.
Song Jiqiang, director of the Intel China Research Institute, did not directly answer this question, but gave his own judgment. In his view, a company must have lasting innovation and profitability in the field of artificial intelligence. It must have a unique application scenario. Second, we must have strong data acquisition capabilities, and three must have core technologies. He mentioned BAT, JD.com and Hikvision.
Liu Hanlun, the general manager of the Beijing Artificial Intelligence Patent Industry Innovation Center, is different from the others. From the perspective of intellectual property rights, he came to the scene of the domestic artificial intelligence enterprise.
Liu Hanlun introduced that with a view to the world, the current major patent holders include IBM, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft. From a domestic point of view, companies with advantages in patents on artificial intelligence include BAT, HKUST, and Shang Tang. However, in the world's top 20 in artificial intelligence patents, there is no Chinese company.
Some time ago, an international organization surveyed the world’s top 24 artificial intelligence chip companies. Seven of these companies are Chinese companies.
'We have divided these companies into Chinese companies and foreign companies for comparison, and we have made a rough count of the number of patents owned by these companies. ' Liu Yulun explained that this can represent the overall degree of emphasis on intellectual property by AI chip companies, or Intellectual property strength.
The results of the study are thought-provoking. Liu Yulun said that 17 foreign AI chip companies have 400,000 patents globally. The domestic 7 AI chip companies own a total of 55,000 patents. Compared with the former, the gap is very high. Great.
Among the seven domestic manufacturers of artificial intelligence chips, the number of patents is at the forefront of Huawei and Taiwan’s MediaTek. If these two companies are removed, the results are simply “horrible” in Liu’s words.
According to the application status of artificial intelligence patents, we can also see the development trend of artificial intelligence in the future.
Liu Xiaolun analyzed that from the perspective of patent applications, competition in the field of artificial intelligence in the future is mainly between China and the United States. In terms of the number of patents, there is a gap between China and the United States, which is still not worth looking at. It is even more worrying that many labor Fundamental patents in the field of intelligence are held in the hands of US companies.
This is due to the fact that the US artificial intelligence technology started earlier than China, so it has a large number of basic core patents. On the other hand, the artificial intelligence enterprises in China tend to apply R&D, and there are more patents for the application side of the application. The core patent became a short board. This is not a small worry for the development of the domestic artificial intelligence industry.
Another worrying point is that compared with the global layout patents of European and American artificial intelligence companies, more than 90% of the patents applied by Chinese artificial intelligence enterprises are domestic patents. 'This means that the future of Chinese artificial intelligence products After leaving the country, there may be a situation of 'streaking' in terms of intellectual property protection. 'Liu Hanlun said. Science and Technology Daily
3. Patent fees game 5G standard business opportunities for Chinese manufacturers
On May 21st, Samsung Electronics announced that it will hold the final meeting of the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) working group in Busan, South Korea from May 21st to May 25th. This meeting will finalize the relevant standard technologies for commercialization of 5G. In the next month, the standards after the review will be formally announced. The industry generally believes that the determination of the 5G standard not only relates to the future technology trends, but more importantly relates to the patent fees, and even relates to the country’s right to speak. Major companies are striving to win. Although it seems that foreign technology giants take the initiative, but the formulation of standards has not yet ended, Chinese companies still have a great opportunity.
Commercialization criteria are determined
According to Samsung’s announcement, about 1,500 standard experts from chipsets, cell phone and equipment suppliers, including Samsung, Qualcomm, and Verizon, AT&T, NTT DoCoMo, KT and SK Telecom, will participate in this event. The meeting held in Busan to complete the first edition of the 5G phase.
At this meeting, all working groups that develop 5G wireless technologies (RAN Working Groups 1-5) will be summarized to determine the final technologies for commercialization of 5G, including ultra-high-speed data and ultra-low latency 5G wireless access technologies. And the conformance testing method for 5G terminals. The RAN4 working group chaired by Samsung will determine the radio performance requirements for 5G terminals and base stations including the 3.5GHz and 28GHz frequency bands.
It is reported that Huawei, OPPO, Vivo and other Chinese mobile phone manufacturers will also participate in the conference. Huawei's 5G product line president Yang Chaobin said: 'According to plan, this meeting will complete the standard technology for 5G independent networking (SA), after review It will be formally announced at the US RAN plenary next month that Huawei has also prepared a proposal. After the standard is established, enterprises can use the standard-based equipment for commercial use. 'OPPO, vivo also said that there will be technical contributions and participate in discussions.
According to the information of the Beijing Commercial Daily reporter, the first edition of the 5G standard is divided into Non-Stand Alone (NSA) and Stand Alone (SA). The non-independent networking is an interim solution. The main goal is to increase the bandwidth of hotspots and rely on 4G base stations and 4G core networks. The independent network can realize all the new 5G features, and is conducive to the full capabilities of 5G. It is an industry-recognized 5G target solution. Last December 3GPP approved for the first time the existing 4G LTE as a 5G non-independent (NSA) standard for connection to the 5G hub. The 5G independent (SA) standard will be completed at this meeting in Busan. The first standard in the 5G phase will be adopted by the 3GPP next month. The meeting was officially approved in the United States.
In addition, the 5G standard has three scenarios. In 2016, it was determined to be 1/3, and the remaining 2/3 will be determined next month. The three scenes of the 5G standard are the eMBB scenario coding scheme; mMTC corresponds to large-scale objects. Networked service scenarios; URLLC corresponds to driverless, industrial automation and other services that require low latency and highly reliable connectivity. The eMBB scenario coding scheme corresponds to high-traffic mobile broadband service scenarios such as 3D and ultra-high definition video. LDPC data has been identified. Channel, control channel is Polar.
Samsung's strength in 5G should not be underestimated. As of this month, Samsung holds 1,254 patents in 5G. Samsung Electronics ranked first in the list of 3GPP member companies that filed 5G standard patents with the European Telecommunication Standardization Organization (ETSI).
Patent fee game
5G will bring about a new round of global mobile communications technology revolution and construction boom. At the same time, it will also include new opportunities for Qualcomm, Huawei, ZTE, Ericsson, Samsung and other major technology companies. The 5G standard dispute is essentially a patent. Competition.
Industrial watcher Hong Shibin said: 'When companies research standards, they will propose a series of related patents that use the standard. After the standard is established, all people who use the standard need to pay royalties to the party that has obtained the right to use the relevant patents. 5G mobile phones have been put into commercial use. Afterwards, all mobile phone manufacturers need to pay patent licensing fees to patent holders. For enterprises failing to apply for standards, losing one standard not only means that the funds spent on the previous research and development standards will not be paid, but will be passed on to the patentee later. Huge amount of royalties. '
In November last year, Qualcomm announced a 5G patent fee plan in a high-profile manner. 5G handsets using Qualcomm's mobile core patents worldwide must pay royalties in accordance with the following terms: 2.75% for single-mode 5G handsets; 3G/4G for multi-mode 5G handsets. /5G)3.25%. For those 5G mobile phones that use the core patent of Qualcomm mobile network standard, non-core patents, the charge rate is: 4% for single-mode 5G mobile phones; 5% for multi-mode 5G mobile phones (3G/4G/5G) According to this standard, domestic mobile phone manufacturers must pay 97.5-150 yuan to Gaotong for each handset sold for 3,000 yuan.
Qualcomm has always been the overlord of the patent market. The company has a lot of standard necessary patents in the 2G era, especially CDMA. After that, many 3G technologies have also evolved from CDMA. 3G technologies include CDMA2000, WCDMA, and TD-SCDMA. Among the standards, CDMA2000 is dominated by Qualcomm, WCDMA is dominated by Nokia and Ericsson, and TD-SCDMA is led by China (mainly ZTE, Huawei, China Mobile and other vendors), with certain independent intellectual property rights (TD-SCDMA). Some still use CDMA technology. However, the former two occupy the largest market, and TD-SCDMA is limited to the Chinese market. Although the latter two do not seem to be directly related to Qualcomm, Qualcomm has mastered the core technology of CDMA, so whether it is Ericsson or not. Still Nokia, or a Chinese manufacturer using TD-SCDMA technology, needs to pay royalties to Qualcomm.
In the 4G era, it is FDD-LTE and TD-LTE. Although China's dominant TD-LTE has independent intellectual property rights, in fact, more than 90% of the patents of the two systems are common. According to the previous monopoly of Qualcomm. Some of the information in the case shows that Qualcomm still owns a lot of LTE patents (either TD-LTE or FDD-LTE). 'After investigation and recognition by the National Development and Reform Commission, Qualcomm can still charge a 3.5% patent fee for TD-LTE technology'. This is an important reason why many Chinese mobile phone manufacturers have signed patent licensing agreements with Qualcomm in 2016.
According to industry insiders, it can be seen that patent fees are crucial for technology companies. Previously, standards including 5G communication data codes and control codes have been established. Among the three standards, Huawei lost by a single vote. With the dominance, only the standard of the control code was obtained. The long code and short code standards were won by Qualcomm.
Opportunity is still great
According to Xiang Ligang, a senior communication expert, Chinese companies have not completely lost their opportunities. 'In terms of patent fees, no single standard is completed by a single company, and companies with different standards have patents. In terms of quantity, Chinese companies and foreign technology giants are also required to cross-patent patents.' Xiang Ligang said.
Hong Shibin believes that Huawei is pleased to win the final solution of the control channel eMBB scene coding. The application of Polar coding to the 5G scenario is very high. Huawei uses the Polar code as the channel coding method in the 5G field test to achieve 27 Gbps. The downstream rate of 27Gbps means that downloading a large sandbox game like GTA5 takes only a few seconds.
However, the significance of this matter does not have to be overstated. Polar Code is not a 5G standard, but a coding scheme. From the 5G application scenario, the eMBB owned by Huawei is only one of the scenes for 5G applications. ' Hong Shibin said.
In terms of the formulation of the 5G standard, Xiang Ligang believes that although 5G has already faced commercial use, 5G technology has not yet fully matured, and energy has not been fully released. In the three major application scenarios of 5G, in addition to the eMBB scenario coding scheme, the other two The scenarios have not yet established standards. Autopilot and IoT scenarios have enormous energy release space. Huawei should continue to work hard to seize these air gaps. 'In the high-traffic scenario, there is no chance that Huawei can continue to test more advanced protocols. Standards, continue to develop advanced application technologies, and can also cooperate with China's mobile communications companies to upgrade 5G accordingly.
Of course, behind the discourse of the 5G standard is the national power. Chinese companies must work together to fight for the discourse power of the 5G standard. In the 5G era, Chinese companies represented by Huawei and ZTE have already deployed ahead of schedule and obtained first-mover advantage. The communications industry needs to have a place in the global 5G era. It still needs the coordinated development of related enterprises and organizations throughout the industry chain to jointly respond to the opponents in the international communications industry.
In addition to Huawei, ZTE also plays an important role in the 5G battle. Among them, ZTE only made several important breakthroughs in the 5G field in 2017.
In February 2017, ZTE released a full range of 5G pre-commercial base stations and launched the 5G bearer scheme Flexhual based on IP+Light. In October of the same year, ZTE cooperated with Italy's Wind Tre and Open Fiber to launch the first 5G pre-commercial network in Europe. In December of the same year, ZTE launched a 5G core product based on a service architecture.
4.After HTC, Asus is also accused of infringement by Japan Chemicals in Japan
In the micro-message message, Japanese LED manufacturer Nichia Corp. has just issued a statement alleging that the Japanese subsidiary ASUS JAPAN and its distributor, SYNNEX Infotec, have infringed the white LED patent, which was transferred to Tokyo on May 18, 2018. The District Court filed a patent infringement lawsuit and requested damages.
It is understood that the Asus smart phones accused of carrying infringing white LEDs are ZenFone GO (ZB551KL, ZC500TG) and ZenFone 2 Laser (ZE500KL).
Nichia Chemical said that the above-mentioned several smart phones manufactured by Asustek, which carried the white LED flash light falls into Nichia Japan's LED patent No. 5177317, No. 5610056 power, and filed the lawsuit.
In response, Asustek responded that one of the lawsuits was that the lawsuit was mainly a dispute between Nichia Chemical and ASUS parts suppliers. It had discussed with the supplier and was arranged by the supplier to handle it properly. The second issue was Nichia Chemical's lawsuit. Both of the patents claimed in the claim have expired and the lawsuit only addresses past usage records. Asustek emphasized that the lawsuit will not affect Asustek's current mobile phone business and operations.
In fact, Asus ZenFone was not the first mobile phone brand to be infringed by Nichia Chemical. In October 2016, Nichia Chemical also sued HTC Desire 626 for the infringement of white LEDs configured with the above two Japanese LED patents. At the same time, he also made a statement to the Tokyo grounds and asked for damages.
5.Huawei VS Samsung: A long-term 'patent war'
Due to a patent for invention, Huawei Terminal Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Huawei) and Samsung (China) Investment Co., Ltd., Tianjin Samsung Communication Technology Co., Ltd., and Huizhou Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter collectively referred to as Samsung) repeatedly faced courtrooms. The industry has caused quite a stir.
Not long ago, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court concluded the case in which the plaintiff Samsung and the defendant's State Intellectual Property Office Patent Reexamination Board (hereinafter referred to as the Patent Reexamination Board) patented the patent for invalidation and requested an administrative dispute to maintain the validity of the invention patent held by Huawei. Previously, Samsung filed a request for invalidation of a patent right against a Patent Reexamination Board against a patent in question. The Patent Reexamination Board found that the invalidity of the requestor was not established and the patent right was valid.
In the eyes of people in the industry, in recent years, Huawei has been negotiating patent cross-licensing with Samsung, but the result is not satisfactory. Huawei has won successive series of patent disputes, and it has added important importance to its cross-license negotiations with Samsung. Chips. In the future, Samsung may need to rethink its business strategy and patent layout strategy in the Chinese market.
One patent triggers multiple disputes
In 2010, Huawei submitted a patent application and obtained an authorization. On June 27, 2016, Huawei infringed five defendants including Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. to the Intermediate People’s Court of Quanzhou, Fujian Province on the ground of patent infringement. Quanzhou Intermediate Court) asked the court to order the five defendants to stop the infringement, and to compensate the economic loss of 80 million yuan and a reasonable cost of 500,000 yuan.
After hearing the case, Quanzhou Intermediate People's Court held that the infringement of the respondent was established. In addition, the Quanzhou Intermediate People’s Court ruled that Samsung’s compensation for Huawei’s economic losses and reasonable expenses was 80.5 million yuan. After the judgment of the first instance, both Huawei and Samsung were senior citizens of Fujian Province. The court (hereinafter referred to as the Fujian Higher Institute) filed an appeal. After the Fujian Higher Court was tried, except for some adjustments to the part of stopping the infringement, all other cases maintained the judgment of first instance.
After Huawei filed a patent infringement lawsuit, Samsung filed a request for invalidation against the Patent Reexamination Board against the patent involved. The Patent Reexamination Board rejected the request. Samsung refused to accept the suit and filed a lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court. After trial at the Beijing Intellectual Property Court According to the opinion, the judgment rejected the plaintiff’s lawsuit request. Both Samsung and Huawei were dissatisfied and appealed to the Beijing Higher People’s Court. At present, the case is under further investigation.
Prudent trial to maintain the validity of patents
In the above-mentioned disputes between Huawei and Samsung, it is very important that the Patent Reexamination Board maintains the patent rights involved in the case. Then the Patent Re-examination Board decides on what basis to make the review of the case.
According to the case discussion group, the understanding of the technical features defined in the claims should be based on the contents stated in the description, and the overall meaning of the technical features should be clearly defined and compared with the closest prior art. It is worth mentioning that the time for publicizing the audiovisual data evidence can be based on the notarization time of the data, the time recorded in the audiovisual data and the time of publication of the large-scale website. Make inferences.
After the Patent Reexamination Board made the decision on the sued review, it attracted wide attention from the industry. Analysis by industry insiders, the suing review decision explained that in determining the scope of protection of the claims, the substance of the invention should be fully grasped and the technical features of the claims should be invented. The substantive understanding provides an objective basis for novelty and creative evaluation.
Litigation aims to cooperate
The reporter learned from the interview that in recent years, Huawei Company has initiated multiple patent infringement lawsuits against Samsung and involved multiple patents. At the same time, Samsung also counterattacked and filed a request for invalidation of patent rights for several patents involved. .
As for the frequent patent litigations of the two communications giants, some experts analyzed that for a long period of time, Huawei and Samsung did not enter into a patent cross-licensing cooperation. One of the important reasons is that Samsung Company charged Huawei with excessive fees and was unreasonable. Patent Licensing Fees. The reason why Huawei launched a series of lawsuits is that it hopes to demonstrate its technical strength through lawsuits and expand its brand influence. It is also trying to explore the new patent operation ecosystem through patent litigation. Huawei’s continued success in a series of disputes helps It continued negotiations with Samsung to force Samsung to make concessions. If Samsung does not concede, both parties may continue to fight in patent litigation.
From this expert's point of view, the series of lawsuits of Huawei and Samsung also played a warning role for domestic mobile terminal manufacturers. In the future, China's mobile terminal manufacturers should not only pay attention to patent layout, but also should actively participate in mobile communication and smart phone technology standards. Formulated to continuously improve market competitiveness. China Trade News