
Despite being one of the largest patent holders in the United States, Samsung went before the U.S. Supreme Court in December 2015 and filed a petition for a review of the U.S. patent law system. Samsung basically wants the government's interpretation of design patent laws altered and revised for 21st century sensibilities. Their brief claims that the system is "antiquated" and that its current form stifles innovation across the entire tech industry.
Samsung's argument has validity. Here's a quote from AndroidAuthority with some details,
Samsung is not alone in their indictment of the U.S. Patent Law system; Google, Facebook and dozens of other organizations have joined forces with Samsung and filed amicus briefs supporting this stance. Here's a quote from Slashgear with a few more details,The logic is as follows: patent law was originally invented to protect ideas or inventions central to a product, but the products were so simple that a single patent might suffice. But times have changed. A smartphone can require up to a quarter billion patents, and if even one of those is found to infringe on a patent, the entirety of the product’s profit can be awarded to the patent holder. This is called the “total-profit” rule, and it is why patent trolling is such a popular business these days.
What do you think of these arguments from Samsung and most of the global tech community regarding U.S. patent law needing to be revised?So far the Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to hear Samsung's case or not, which is why the likes of Google, Facebook, Dell, HP, the EFF, and more are urging the country's highest court to do so, saying that the interpretation of design patents by the Federal Circuit is "out of touch with economic realities" and could "hinder innovation". If the Supreme Court does decide to hear the case, it will be the first time it would do so in more than a century.