What did Huawei win over Samsung's patent infringement?

Author: Tieliu Lead: The commercial factors in this rights defense lawsuit are also much higher than technical factors. And time coincides with the storm of Sino-Korea diplomatic relations, it is difficult for people not to make other associations. Lei Feng network press: The author of this article Tie Liu, Lei Feng network (public number: Lei Feng network) first article. According to the report of Quanzhou.net on April 6, the first instance of Huawei’s rights defense case ended with Samsung’s (China) Investment Co., Ltd. and other three defendants jointly paying 80 million yuan. Although I saw the headline of the news report, the author guessed that Samsung may have infringed upon the communications patents Huawei had mastered. However, after browsing the relevant content, it was discovered that rights protection is not related to heavyweight patents in communications, but only to the operating system UI. Interaction design patent. From the author's point of view, the victory of this lawsuit is not so much a technical victory for Huawei. It is better to say that the interests of large companies are played in a patent warfare way. Samsung Infringement: What is ZL201010104157.0 In early 2010, Huawei filed an invention patent application with the State Intellectual Property Office on a technology solution that could be applied to the processing methods and user equipment of terminal components display. The application was granted patent right for invention on June 5, 2011. The number is ZL201010104157.0. The author found the patent name of ZL201010104157.0 through the Chinese and multinational patent examination information inquiry of the State Intellectual Property Office: component display processing method and user equipment. Due to the website's inability to display the view of the patent submitted on February 10, 2010. The author inquires the specific content of CN201010104157.0 patent through the third party website. Here the following description of the ZL and CN, the beginning of the CN indicates that the patent has been published but not necessarily authorized, ZL at the beginning indicates that the patent has been authorized. Although the initial letters of ZL201010104157.0 and CN201010104157.0 are different, they are actually the same patent. According to the patent summary: The embodiments of the present invention provide a component display processing method and user equipment. The method includes: obtaining an indication message that the component is in a pending state; performing a reduction processing on the display area displayed on the screen in the container according to the indication message, so that the screen displays the container in an empty area after the display area is reduced. In the hidden area, the container includes a display area and a hidden area for accommodating components. The user equipment includes an acquisition module for obtaining an indication message that the component is in a pending state; and a processing module for performing a reduction processing on the display area displayed on the screen in the container according to the indication message so that the screen is vacated after the display area is reduced. The area shows the hidden area of ​​the container, and the container includes a display area and a hidden area of ​​the containment component. In the embodiment of the present invention, when the user needs to process the component, the user may be prompted to process the components in the display area and the hidden area. The following is a screenshot of the contents of the patent. Due to space reasons, only some screenshots are taken. From the summary and the screenshot of the patent content, it can be seen that ZL201010104157.0 is a related patent on how to operate the mobile phone in the operation interface, which belongs to the interactive design of the UI. It can also be seen from the media reports: The court held that the patent in question is a framework core patent of the graphical user interface of the smart mobile terminal user. Through the application of the patent, the problem of how to enable the user to easily move and place a specific APP icon in multiple frequency ranges was solved; The application of this patent greatly improves the success rate and accuracy of the system interface operation. However, the three defendants, including Huizhou Samsung, Tianjin Samsung, and Samsung Investment Co., Ltd., are among the top three mobile phone manufacturers in the world. They use patented technology solutions in many types of smart phones and tablet computers manufactured and sold. It can be seen that the patent's market recognition is extremely high. Therefore, the patent involved in the case has a very high creativity, and it contributes greatly to the realization of the intelligent operation of the mobile terminal. According to experience, this is a typical part of the court’s ruling that the media’s coverage of the passage’s coverage of the sentence is invariably quoted by the Quanzhou Court’s judgment. That is to say, after the court’s hearing, the collegial panel considered the patent to be a graphical user interface. The scope of operations is a patent for the interactive design of the UI. How much gold is included in UI interactive design patents UI refers to the user interface design, such as the use of color, icons and other visual effects, etc., is the face of the mobile phone user interface when they pick up the phone, such as rice noodles MIUI very much like. The domestic mobile phone manufacturers have developed UIs based on Android for various purposes. This allows mobile phones with Android operating systems to have different operating interfaces. UI innovation barriers are small, because other people's good things, such as some of the more beautiful designs, or some convenient operation methods, these are easy to follow. For example, a domestic mobile phone maker will follow the design of others and flatten the icons. And many things require the result of brainstorming. In the era of universal education and information explosion, even if you are the smartest person in the world, you cannot guarantee that you are the first to think of ideas. Even the first thought is not necessarily the first one to be realized. Only those ideas that really come to mind and realize, and then succeed in the commercial success of the market, have the right to speak and influence, and they can take advantage of patent litigation. Over the years, domestic mobile phone makers on the UI have used each other's excellent designs from time to time to learn from each other. In fact, not only the UI design of the internal mobile phone manufacturers in the Android camp learn from each other, but the UI of Android phones and Apple phones are more and more like in many aspects. From a practical point of view, patent conflicts on the UI are actually very difficult to avoid, because even big companies cannot avoid themselves from drawing on the designs of others. In product interaction, for example, your finger is automatically unlocked at the bottom of the phone, the right mouse button menu pops up, and the screen is swiped right and left. These logical interactions are also applied for patents by large companies, and because the massive users have Has become a habit of use, resulting in other mobile phone manufacturers in order to meet the user and had to "learn" from the interactive logic of existing practices. In addition, some operational logic, after repeated research, will find that the most concise solution is only one or a few, and the most convenient operation is often applied for by a large company that occupies a preemptive position, which makes latecomers Faced with a dilemma: either "learning from" existing successful experiences, or blazing new trails, and then being ridiculed by the majority of users "operation inconvenient", "operation is not accustomed to", "brain residue design"... In essence, the technology of UI interaction design is relatively limited. I asked senior engineers engaged in the development of domestic Linux operating systems. He said: Core background technology> Top interaction design (such as the new touch behavior for capacitive screens) , from single-point pen to multi-finger touch)> exquisite UI design (such as major manufacturers spend huge sums of money to ask all kinds of big-name designers to do visual design / icon design / brand design), from the technical development point of view, this is High-low patented technology. At the same time, he also stated that: In addition to the core technology behind the scenes, the software innovation, in fact, established a complete interaction design team and product manager team, carefully study user behavior, find pain points, use the most simple and intuitive interactive logic to solve The user's problem is also very valuable. With regard to the patent of ZL201010104157.0, the gold content is relatively limited compared to Huawei patents such as soft frequency reuse. To some extent, the positioning of the ZL201010104157.0 is somewhat similar to Microsoft's pop-up context menu system. Specific patents describe capturing and displaying a series of commands on a user-selected object in a pop-up menu, that is, other operating systems. There seems to be consistency with the behavior described in this patent and there is a high probability of being convicted of infringement. Therefore, it is known that netizens describe the play as Microsoft's Tu Long Dao. God blocks God and the Buddha blocks the Buddha. Therefore, the value of the ZL201010104157.0 patent is more about the chips of confrontation and game in the patent protection battle between big companies. The commercial factor in this rights defense lawsuit is also far higher than the technical factor.