Infringement of consumer rights?

Infringement of consumer rights?

Consumers pass by a retail outlet of Samsung Electronics in Seoul in this undated photo. After the U.S. jury verdict on Friday, there are growing concerns that the patent dispute between Samsung and Apple will negatively affect consumers’ rights. / Yonhap 'Apple tax' to limit innovation and consumer choices By Kim Yoo-chul Ever since the patent dispute between Apple and Samsung Electronics began, the U.S. technology giant has said that Samsung infringed on its patents, which it claims is hurting innovation and deceiving consumers. Ironically, the highly-controversial jury verdict in California is likely to limit consumer choices for mobile phones and negatively influence innovation as people should be prepared to pay an ``Apple tax,’’ according to industry experts. ``So far, Apple has been insisting the consumer is king. But its move is likely to hurt consumers and limit choice. That’s irony,’’ said Park Seong-min, a local patent attorney. Apple is already moving to ask major handset makers to license various Apple designs and software innovation. ``There may be a big Apple tax,’’ said IDC analyst Al Hilwa. ``Phones will be more expensive.’’ Apple spokesman in Korea, Steve Park, wasn’t available for comment. In its closing argument, Samsung stressed consumers make the right choice and don’t make mistakes. But nine U.S. jurors didn’t accept this, though consumer values and fair competition have been considered as the rights of Americans. ``Apple’s argument that consumers will confuse a Samsung phone with an iPhone is totally idiotic. You should buy Apple devices in Apple’s designated Apple Store. But when you want to buy Samsung mobile phones, you just go BestBuy or even small outlets near your house. When a consumer visits any authorized local vendors for Samsung phones, then they buying a Samsung phone in mind,’’ said a Samsung official, Thursday. The Korean firm in a statement following the verdict maintained that the decision will hurt both consumers and innovation. ``Can you say Samsung simply copied the iPhone? You can’t say. Designers are usually influenced from here and there. Influence comes from various things. Apple’s iPhone maybe one influence, however, that doesn’t mean Samsung is a copycat,’’ said a designer who asked to only be identified as Park at LG Electronics. Patent experts and analysts say Apple wants to force Samsung from its home soil as the American company is losing its grip there, with the rapid rise in Galaxy sales by its Korean rival. ``The main implication of the verdict is that less competition means higher prices and less inclination for innovation,’’ said Seo Won-suk, an analyst at Korea Investment. According to Seo, mobile phone makers will feel that they have to ``effectively manage risks’’ for their gadgets. ``An expected rise in costs of risk management will simply be passed on to general consumers and this management is going to result in playing it rather safe, which will see phone makers to pull away from innovation and limit consumer choice,’’ said the analyst. LG Electronics, Taiwan’s HTC and Motorola are widely seen to be negotiating with Apple for cross-licensing deals, said Lee Chang-hoon, a local patent attorney from intellectual property law firm Aju Yanghun. An LG Electronics spokesman declined to comment whether it has plans to do so, while HTC representatives weren’t available for comments. ``Smartphones and tablets are everywhere. Apple doesn’t have the full authority to kick its rivals out of the market. Without technology, surface design is nothing. That’s why Samsung is preparing to highlight prior technology in the appeals court,’’ said a high-ranked Samsung Electronics executive. Apple is seeking a complete sales ban on some Samsung goods in the United States, however, Samsung’s key products such as the Galaxy S3 should be safe from Apple’s design attack as the surface design of the S3 is completely curved, different from the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S.

yckim@koreatimes.co.kr