Apple Inc. (AAPL) crushes Samsung – again – in Japanese court decision

Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) has once again pummeled its rival Samsung in the legal arena, as a Japanese court ruled today in favor of the Cupertino company in the latest of a series of patent-related confrontations between the two tech giants. Samsung had launched a suit alleging that several of Apple’s products, including the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and iPhone 4S, were illegally copied from Samsung designs. Today, however, Hasegawa Koji, the Tokyo District Court Judge hearing the case, ruled decisively in Apple’s favor and declared the items in question non-infringing.

Samsung, of course, plans to appeal the decision, but in light of former setbacks suffered by the South Korean electronics firm, it is unlikely that these will serve as more than a face-saving protest after a decisive loss. Apple Inc. (AAPL) has lost to Samsung on occasion, too, as in a 2013 case when the Cupertino firm’s claims that its competitor had copied its patented media synchronization techniques were peremptorily dismissed by Judge Shoji Tamotsu.

On balance, however, Apple Inc. (AAPL) has come out ahead of its rival in the courtroom, probably because there is some merit to its claims of Samsung’s sometimes rather blatant copycatting. The $900 million award Apple gained last year is a feather in its cap that Samsung will be hard put to match at any time. In fact, the nearly $1 billion penalty assessed against the South Korean company is still the global record setter for patent related damages.

Leaving aside such rare cash windfalls, the ongoing struggle between Apple and Samsung seems to be one of sparring to establish space and maintain reputation rather than an out and out attempt to bankrupt the other company. Each firm is too large, powerful, wealthy, and entrenched to completely smash the other. Instead, the patent lawsuits could be argued to serve two functions.

In the first place, they are a check on behavior. They help to establish limits over which each company will not go, even if these limits are hazy, fluid, and constantly changing. Without the check of legal action, the copying might become even more blatant. The low-level legal skirmishing that goes on most of the time serves to remind both Samsung and Apple Inc. (AAPL) that their adversary, however annoying, also deserves a certain measure of respect and circumspection.

The other function of the legal grandstanding both companies engage in is probably as a form of advertising. The wrangles serve to keep both firms in the news. Furthermore, they help to build brand loyalty as Apple enthusiasts gnash their teeth over Samsung’s latest “ripoff,” or Samsung supporters cry out against the oppressive market power of Apple. The legal proceedings are not as vain as they appear when viewed from outside the box – as no doubt some strategists at both Apple Inc. and Samsung are capable of doing.