Professor Sunder Comments on Apple v. Samsung Patent Suit for Capital Public Radio
Professor Madhavi Sunder commented for local National Public Radio Affiliate KXJZ on the recent Apple v. Samsung patent suit verdict in which a federal district court found that Samsung violated numerous Apple patents and awarded Apple more than $1 billion in damages. In an interview on Capital Public Radio's Insight program, Professor Sunder said that the finding was unusual because it was based on the look and feel of Apple products and not their basic utility, which is more typically the issue in patent cases. She said the real issue is whether patents in "design" are warranted in the first place.
"Why are we giving 14-year monopoly rights for companies that create a cool design?" she said. "We usually give patents in areas where you need that extra monopoly incentive to induce innovation, but creating a cool product? We have everyday market incentives to create that. If you create cool the public will come, and Apple is the evidence of that."
Professor Sunder also spoke on how the verdict's theme of innovation based on borrowing -- or in some cases, stealing -- relates to her new book, From Goods to a Good Life: Intellectual Property and Global Justice, recently published on Yale University Press.
Madhavi Sunder is a Professor of Law at King Hall whose special interests included intellectual property, law and culture studies, women's rights, and international intellectual property.