Esha Ranganath IEOR 190G: Patent Engineering 04.09.08

1. LCD Patent Cases: Sharp vs. Samsung LG Philips LCD vs. Chunghwa Picture Tubes Esha Ranganath IEOR 190G: Patent Engineering 04.09.08

2. What is LCD? • LCD: Liquid Crystal Display is a thin, flat display device made up of any number of thin crystals • The crystals act like tiny shutters, opening or closing in response to the stimulus, thereby allowing degrees of light that have passed through specific colored pixels to illuminate the screen, creating a picture. • These display screens are used in televisions, computer monitors, and cell phones • LCD TV sales have increased in the last year to approximately $17.5 billion in the third quarter. However, steep price declines have made it difficult for many LCD TV suppliers to generate profits.

3. Sharp vs. Samsung The Case • Sharp portrays itself as the leader in LCD technologies since the 1970s when it first used LCD displays in calculators. • Sharp Corporation filed a lawsuit in August 2007 against Samsung Electronics for five patent violations centering around methods Sharp invented to improve the quality of LCD displays • Sharp asked for compensation, a ban on infringing products, and a court trial. • The two companies tried to negotiate a deal; however, Sharp sued Samsung after the attempt for a licensing agreement fell through.

4. Sharp vs. Samsung: Patent Details • 1. U.S. Patent 4649383: A technology to drive LCDs to realize image display with a high contrast ratio • 2. U.S. Patent 5760855: Static induced damage to LCD is prevented by guarding wiring • 3. U.S. Patent 6052162: An LCD with an electrode configuration that improves display quality by improving the light use efficiency of picture elements. • 4. U.S. Patent 7027024: A driving device of LCD that improves display quality • 5. U.S. Patent 7057689: An LCD with an optical film that achieves a wide viewing angle by compensating phase difference

5. Sharp vs. Samsung: Results • The court trial is still pending in the United States. • Meanwhile, Sharp has also filed a lawsuit against Samsung in Korea asking for compensation for sale damages and prohibition of future production. • Samsung has refused negotiations and seeks to fight it out in court. • Meanwhile, Sharp is determined to win back the No.1 spot in LCD TV distribution by spending $3.20 billion to build the world’s largest LCD panel plant. • Sharp has sued other companies for violations in the past: i.e. Taiwan’s HannStar Display Corp.

6. LG Philips vs. CPT: The Case • Four year long patent dispute between LG Philips and Taiwan based company Chunghwa Picture Tubes. • LG Philips LCD accused CGT on two fronts: • 1) The violation of thin film transistor LCD technology • 2) Side mounting technology: A method where the cover of the LCD module is attached using screws on the side rather than from the front. This allows for slimmer LCD modules. This particular case was filed in August 2002. • LG claims to have filed the lawsuit only after CPT refused to cease its infringing activities or negotiate.

7. LG Philips vs. CPT: Patent Details • LG Philips LCD is fighting CPT infringements on six US patents relating to thin-film transistor LCD technology: • U.S. Patent 4624737: Provide a simplified process for producing a thin film transistor with an improved contact process. • U.S. Patent 6373537: Increases the ratio of the viewing area to the whole area of the computer display while providing a thin, lightweight display unit

8. LG Philips vs. CPT: Results • The case was finally settled in November 2007 after two previous trials: • July 2006: The court awarded $52.4 million to LG • November 2006: The court awarded $53.5 million to LG • The current decision includes a cross-licensing agreement to share past and future patents. • Both companies believe this will strengthen their competitiveness in the industry. • Additionally, CPT will pay an undisclosed amount to LG Philips LCD • LG Philips has filed two additional lawsuits against AU Optronics and Chi Mei Optoelectronics