The Recycler
  • Static Control June 2022 Masthead Ad
  • Ninestar June 2022 Masthead Banner
  • ECS Web ad March 2022
  • Katun March Web Advert 2021
  • Biuromax Web banner June 2022

Samsung wins Dutch IP case

Samsung wins Dutch IP case

December 7, 2016

The District Court of The Hague

The District Court of The Hague

The OEM won a case at the Court of The Hague against two Dutch companies over patent infringement.

The case ruling, which you can view here (in Dutch), concerned intellectual property, with Samsung suing Maxperian and Digital Revolution, who were among those sued by the OEM two years ago, in a case that the OEM initially lost. However, the OEM continued to fight, and 123inkt.nl, which owns Digital Revolution, eventually won an appeal in this specific case in 2015.

This latest case makes mention of the earlier cases, and the OEM was aiming to stop infringement in relation to toner cartridges, with reference made to counterclaims by Maxperian in particular against the OEM. The court’s decision reflected separate areas of the case, and saw it order Maxperian to withdraw patent-infringing products “within five days” of the judgement (which would have been 5 December, as the ruling was made on 30 November).

In turn, Digital Revolution was also told to remove “unlawful comparative advertising”, with both companies to pay the OEM €10,000 ($10,730) “for each violation of the orders”, or the patents that were infringed. Samsung also had the option to ask for €10,000 per day “that the violation continues” to a maximum figure of €1 million ($1.07 million).

Both companies are also to “provide a written statement of the number of sold infringing products, the corresponding turnover and the profit that was achieved”, as well as buyers and suppliers of the products’ details, with this needing to be undertaken “within two months of notification”. Both were also set to have to pay Samsung “within a period of 30 days” damages to Samsung.

Finally, both companies – within 48 hours of the judgement – needed to post a notice of the judgement “at least a quarter of the screen height and having at least a 16 point font” for two weeks, stating that “the court in the Hague ruled in a judgement […] that several of our private label printer cartridges infringe intellectual property rights […] and may no longer be offered”. Both were also commanded to send this out in a letter or email “within 14 days” to all customers.

Both companies were required to destroy all returned infringing products, as well as those in stock, at their “own expense” within 60 days of the judgement, and hand in a receipt of proof. Maxperian’s costs in reimbursing Samsung’s legal fees were estimated at €123,354.22 ($132,368.51), while Digital Revolution’s were said to total €123,424.60 ($132,444.03), with further legal costs to be paid of €6,410.63 ($6,879.09).

Categories : Around the Industry

Tags : IP Samsung The Netherlands

  • Static Control June 2022 Big & Bold Ad
  • Aster Big & Bold Web ad May 2022
  • IR Italiana Web ad January 2021
  • GM Technology June 2022 Web ad
  • Apex UStation web banner
  • Mito Big & Bold Web ad May 2022
  • GPI Web ad June 2022
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • CTS New Ad March 2022
  • CET June 2022 Web ad
  • HYB Web banner
  • Zhono web ad May 2022
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • HYB Web banner
  • CTS New Ad March 2022
  • CET June 2022 Web ad
  • Zhono web ad May 2022
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • CET June 2022 Web ad
  • Zhono web ad May 2022
  • CTS New Ad March 2022
  • HYB Web banner
  • ITP Web ad January 2021

The Recycler, Wittas House, Two Rivers, Station Lane, Witney, OX28 4BH, United Kingdom | Tel: +44 (0) 1993 899800 | Fax : +44 (0) 1993 226899
©2006-2021 The Recycler - Terms & Conditions - Privacy Policy including cookie use

Web design Dorset | Websites by Mark

The Recycler Subscribe Web ad January 2021
The Recycler Subscribe Web ad January 2021