Chinese Company Learns From The West: Builds Up Big Patent Portfolio, Uses It To Sue Apple In China
from the just-as-Techdirt-predicted dept
For many years now, Western governments have been complaining about China's supposed lack of respect for intellectual monopolies, and constantly pushing the country's politicians to tighten the legal framework protecting them. To anyone not blinded by an unquestioning belief in the virtues of copyright and patent maximalism, it was pretty clear where this strategy would end. Indeed, over five years ago, Mike warned where this was leading: towards China repeatedly punishing foreign companies to protect domestic Chinese firms -- in other words, leveraging patents as a tool for protectionism. A post on the IAM blog about legal action taken by the Chinese company BYD, one of Apple's suppliers, shows that Techdirt's predictions are well on the way to being realized:
Apple says BYD filed a pair of patent infringement suits in the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court alleging that the antennae in the iPhone 6 plus and various other Apple products infringe BYD’s intellectual property.
Five other defendants working with Apple were also sued -- four Chinese suppliers, and one Chinese distributor.
BYD asked the [Chinese] bench to require "all six defendants to both cease allegedly infringing conduct and destroy allegedly infringing products".
In effect, this is a patent attack on Apple's supply chain in China, and one that would be devastating for the US company if successful. The IAM post points out:
Of the seven final assembly facilities for iPhones, only one is outside of China (a Foxconn facility in Sao Paolo, Brazil). That means any company with valid Chinese patents that it thinks reads on Apple products potentially has a lot of leverage.
There are two crucial elements that make Apple so vulnerable here. First, the fact that its assembly facilities are concentrated in China, and secondly, because there's a Chinese company with patents it thinks it can use against Apple in that country. A March 2014 press release from BYD boasted that it had already amassed more than 12,000 domestic patents and over 8,000 international ones; the figures today are doubtless much higher. Amongst those domestic patents there are probably many that could come in handy for future legal action against other Western companies that assemble their products in China.
Those in the West who pushed China to show more "respect" for patents must be feeling so proud of the progress that Chinese companies have made in this regard, and so pleased now to see Apple being sued in local courts using China's patent laws.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: china, intellectual monopolies, intellectual property, patent thicket, patents, smartphones
Companies: apple, byd, foxconn
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Well said
Ehud
Tucson AZ US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well said
Live by the suit, die by the suit!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well said
China invented many of the things we take for granted, including paper and fireworks. They were light years ahead of us for centuries until their civilisation began to implode from stagnation and corruption. I daresay the Opium Wars and aftermath didn't help. To even imagine, then, that these people would fall for an "Emperor's New Clothes" type scam is ridiculous in the extreme. I reckon that the minute they heard about "Intellectual property" they crept away to have a damn good laugh, then pretended to have fallen for it.
This is why exceptionalism is so damn pointless.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't see a problem here.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
I chuck this one up to poetic justice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Problem? Problem? I'll tell you what the problem is, it's been so long since we had a good comedy article that I'm out of popcorn, and will have to go and get some more!
This is a serious issue, how am I supposed to enjoy the schadenfreude to it's fullest on an empty stomach?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The preceding verse says "put your sword away". A pity that the US pro-patent lobby don't read their bibles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
or a floating old cheap oil tanker?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
the problem is they want to force the cheap labor to subsidize for the project, who by definition are well under-payed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because apple is more chinese than "american"?
BY ANY scale?
if apple paid taxes in the US or had real employees (not only sales kids and "geniuses" then this could be a problem.
but apple is just a foreign stock with lots of stores in the us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Hope this sets off some alarms and the US starts pushing for a saner, functional system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Those that insist that the patent system is all sunshine and roses, without any downsides, will either just ignore the issue, pretending it's not happening, or find some way to claim that while this is an abuse of the patent system, when applied 'properly'(that is used against small companies/inventors rather than large companies) the patent system is infallible, and nothing but good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Apple outsources all its manufacturing offshore, but it does most product development in the US. Those are real engineering jobs, not retail.
Apple is pretty much a multinational now. It's no more a Chinese company than it is a US company. It's independent of nationality. This is how most large corporations are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The global bubble is starting to pop
I'm really curious if Apple will adapt or if it will crash and burn, but either way cheap Chinese corporations are going to become competition to the USian corporations instead of what the partners they were so far.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Short term effects
Apple is powerful enough to quickly set up factories elsewhere.
Then China will lose a lot of manufacturing and the cycle will start again in another country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Short term effects
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Short term effects
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Short term effects
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Short term effects
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Short term effects
I know, it is brilliant!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Short term effects
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Short term effects
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Short term effects
they can build a mongrel-proof high tech plant anywhere in a year tops...
for the right price
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
but lets say we could get that into the equation...
Who pays more in salaries within the USA? apple or BYD?
Who paid more in taxes within the USA in 2014? (minus subsidies)
Who is going to pay more in taxes within the USA in 2017?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
apple is a "US company" and BYD is a "chinese company"
when actually Buffet could be equally investing in both,
and both could be registered as charity foundations in PO boxes in the same house in Lichtenstein.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
tiny chinese garage supplier of apple iphone screen coating buys apple in a stock swap program
this brilliant genius arrangement allowed the company to dodge any taxes, and transfer HQs to china without any legal difficulties.
and the CEO gets a billion bonus this year...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
International Patents?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: International Patents?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"our German lawyers are better than their German lawyers" type
* "jewish" ommited for PC reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous sceptic
Which raises the question, how many of their patents come from looking at Apples specification?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Money will fix it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a primate would give you an accurate guess on how this is going to turn out.......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rare earth minerals. Available only in China.
Better start looking for a better place to dig dig dig.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Parallel Area of Movies.
--------------------------------------------------
Willy Shih and Henry McGee, Hollywood on the Yellow Sea: Wang Jianlin, one of China’s richest men, is creating a rival to the American dream factory, from scratch.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/hollywood-on-the-yellow-sea/413185/
----- ---------------------------------------
A Chinese zillionaire, more or less government-backed, is instituting a takeover and outsourcing of Hollywood. All the Chinese really want from the United States are the movie stars. They are building a special "cinema city" for the movie stars to live in. Movies which are very expensive to make are generally suited to children, or to naive third-world audiences. Ingmar Bergman, the archetypal grown-up film-maker, never spent very much money, because he didn't blow things up. The American movie theater market is effectively stalled at about four tickets and thirty dollars per person per year, not even a dollar a week. What this reflects is that most Americans are comfortable at home, and don't see any reason to go out to a movie house. Chinese are not as rich as Americans, but they are much more likely to go to movies. Someone who lives in _barracks_ conditions, like many Chinese workers, finds a movie house more comfortable than his barracks. Someone who has a comfortable home also has room for all kinds of _stuff_. He can own various kinds of tools, and amuse himself by making things. Someone who lives in a barracks must, perforce, keep all his belongings in a satchel and/or a locker. This implies a preference for simple and passive entertainments. Thus, the Chinese are becoming the main market for movies. And they have no intention of paying significant foreign exchange for them.
Something roughly similar tends to operate for a tablet computer. There is no very compelling case to use a tablet computer at home. Video games are best played when sitting down (and not while driving-- emphatically not while driving). Beyond a certain threshold, there is no compelling case for a more powerful tablet computer. The kind of people who will eventually push the performance on tablet computers will be those who do not have a place to sit down of their own, for example, someone who spends hours a day, riding in a crowded bus. You can play with a tablet computer under those circumstances, but you cannot do either gardening or carpentry.
It has been estimated that "Chinese-manufactured" electronics are only about five percent Chinese by value-added, and if we take valued-added-by-manufacturing, as distinct from risk assumption, the figure would be more like one percent. Most of the money goes for buying chips and other "clean room" components imported from outside China, and then for software and marketing in the country where the machine is eventually sold. In the field of mechanical watches, there is the notion of a "movement," that is, a dial, and hands, and the gears to make them turn, manufactured as a single unit which fits into an artistically designed case. What I think may happen is that chip-makers, such as Intel, may begin to sell "tablet movements," assembled by machines with essentially zero human labor. A "tablet movement" would include a screen, and processor, memory, etc., bonded to the back of the screen, but it wouldn't have any externally visible label, and it would fit into a standard-sized case which would have a label. The automated factories which produce "tablet movements" would be proximate to chip fabs, which are mostly not in China. Chip fabs do not require cheap labor, you see. Indeed, chip fabs cannot tolerate cheap labor. People have to breathe, and their breath inevitably contaminates the chip-making process. A lot of the small components which China has learned to produce, things like cheap small capacitors and resistors, will be rendered irrelevant by the consolidation of systems into fewer and fewer chips, the so-called "System on a Chip" concept Probably, Intel would be able to obtain funding to set up the necessary factories from the United States Government, on National Security grounds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_on_a_chip
China has not been very successful in off-shoring American chip fabs. That is political in the highest degree, and is likely to provoke government intervention. The are a lot of chip fabs in the United States, and a lot in Europe (especially Germany), and a lot in Japan and South Korea, and a lot in Taiwan, and a lot in Singapore. All of them, even the ones in Taiwan, are effectively out of China's military reach. China will continue to struggle towards the point where it does not have to import chips, but it will be a slow process.
Of course, Apple is now more like Universal Studios than it is like Intel. It is not really indispensable to a government which wants to control the thoughts of the users. The Chinese government will see Apple primarily in terns of the App Store, a system of censorship which they want to convert to their own uses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]