Dyson sues Samsung for ripping off its patented vacuum steering mechanism

“British manufacturer Dyson is suing Samsung over claims that the South Korean firm ‘ripped off’ one of its inventions,” Leo Kelion reports for BBC News.

“The dispute centres over the launch of the Motion Sync vacuum cleaner which the South Korean firm showed off at the Ifa tech show in Berlin last week,” Kelion reports. “Dyson alleges that the machine infringes its patent on a steering mechanism for cylinder cleaners.”

Kelion reports, “‘This looks like a cynical rip-off,’ said Sir James Dyson, the firm’s founder. ‘Samsung has many patent lawyers so I find it hard not to believe that this is a deliberate or utterly reckless infringement of our patent. We have been forced to issue proceedings in the English High Court, but I would much rather invest in research to develop new technology than have to sue.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: IP theft and patent infringement are endemic at slavish copier Samsung.

You know why Samsung makes vacuums? They wanted to have at least one product that doesn’t suck.

Welcome to the “Ripped Off By Samsung” (ROBS) Club, Dyson!

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Fred Mertz,” “Tacitus,” and “Luke” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Apple asks U.S. appeals court to halt Samsung’s slavish copying – August 9, 2013
Samsung slavishly copies Apple’s iPad mini with Galaxy Tab 3 (with photo) – July 23, 2013
9 ways Samsung has slavishly copied Apple over the years – July 14, 2013
Now Samsung copies Apple product rumors, said to be working on wristwatch device – March 19, 2013
Samsung’s new ‘Wallet’ bears striking resemblance to Apple’s Passbook – February 27, 2013
Korea JoongAng Daily: Samsung must stop slavishly copying Apple – September 3, 2012
South Korea reassesses its great imitator, Samsung – September 2, 2012
Convicted patent infringer Samsung acuses Apple of trying to limit consumer choice – September 1, 2012
Is Samsung copying Apple’s patented earphones? It sure looks like it – September 8, 2012
Samsung mimics Apple product videos in Galaxy S III promo (with video) – August 24, 2012
Now slavish copycat Samsung attempts to knockoff Apple’s retail stores (with video) – August 23, 2012
Samsung: Shameless slavish copiers – August 13, 2012
Apple attorney: Instead of innovating, Samsung chose to copy iPhone and iPad – July 31, 2012
Apple: Google warned Samsung against slavishly copying our products – July 25, 2012
Now Samsung slavishly copies Apple’s Mac mini – June 1, 2012
Samsung Mobile chief ‘designer’ denies that Samsung’s instinct is to slavishly copy Apple – March 23, 2012
Slavish copier Samsung shamelessly steals Apple’s iPhone 3G design – again – January 3, 2012
Slavish copier Samsung uses girl actress from iPhone 4S ad for Galaxy Tab 8.9 spot (with video) – January 2, 2012
Now Samsung’s slavishly copying Apple’s iPad television ads (with videos) – December 30, 2011
Judge: Can you tell me which is iPad and which is yours? Samsung lawyer: ‘Not at this distance your honor’ – October 14, 2011
Why are Apple’s icons on the wall of Samsung’s store? – September 24, 2011
Apple to Samsung: ‘Blatant copying is wrong’ – April 18, 2011
Apple sues Samsung for attempting to copy look and feel of iPhone, iPad – April 18, 2011
Samsung’s ‘Instinct’ is obviously to make Apple iPhone knockoffs – April 1, 2008

50 Comments

    1. Dell was Apple’s enemy. So we hated them with vengeance until they became irrelevant
      Then it was M$’s turn (again) and we have almost finished them off.
      Now it is Google’s and Samscum’s turn. You know what the results will be. It won’t happen overnight but we’ll get them in the end.
      Therefore anything negative about those guys is fair game.

      1. Apple is about creating and not negativity. This site often misses the mark when it could show the creativity and beauty of Apple. We don’t really have to put down others to achieve success. We can point out when they are harming Apple by being unethical.

        1. There hasn’t been alot of creativity and beauty coming out of Apple lately. There has been alot of just be patient and wait. 9 months worth. Maybe after today there will be some creativity and beauty to brag about but even then, exposing SameDung and their tactics, methods, and patterns of abuse are definitely fair game.

          For the record, I’m OK with the wait. I don’t want to get a half baked not redy for prime time POS that rushed to the store shelves just to kiss the ugly butt of wall street, tech pundits, and marketers.

  1. “You know why Samsung makes vacuums? They wanted to have at least one product that doesn’t suck.”

    Am I particularly obtuse today, or does this not make sense? Vacuums do suck (air). Is MDN saying that their vacuums don’t work and that’s why they have 1 product that doesn’t suck (even though it’s supposed to)?

    Or was it supposed to read:
    “They wanted to have 1 product that is SUPPOSED to suck”
    Don’t quite get it…

    1. It’s a take on the old joke about Microsoft (or any other target known for generally “sucky” products). It goes something like, “The day Microsoft makes a product that doesn’t suck is the day they make vacuum cleaners.”

      1. Holy crap Spark, you and macman much be a barrel of fun at parties, eh?

        And by the way, you guys are forgetting the “e”…
        It’s spelt samedung 😉

        /h/i

        (that tag is in there for the humor and/or irony challenged. For the record; I know that’s not the way you spell samsung, it’s just funny because samesung rips off other companies designs and then make a somewhat “less than”, derivative copies)

  2. It’s not just Samsung – sometimes it seems to be endemic to Korea. Look at Hyundai/Kia who have copied designs by Mercedes, BMW, Honda and others over the years. It reduces their costs by limiting what they need to spend on design and they can offer products at lower cost.

      1. China has a real problem with ripping off other people’s designs, too. Worse, they pass the rip-offs as the real thing in many cases, which is truly unconscionable.

        But, for the most part the Chinese rip-offs stay within the borders of China (so far). It’s not like they are showing up at major retail outlets around the world (though you may find some on the shelves at the Dollar Store).

        It’s still not right and China should take action against it and they have in a few high profile cases, but they are unlikely to do anything large scale in the near future – it’s a pervasive problem that provides them some benefits.

        1. @JohnJ –
          Those patent-infringing, rip-off products ARE imported into the US on a vast scale, and would be far more prevalent if not for laws that attempt to intercept it.  Your comments make it seem as though Chinese scam artists limit their sales to home markets (and Dollar Stores).

          Since Chinese laws are incomplete/unenforced, it is no surprise that American companies can’t find justice there.  Chinese people can’t find justice there, either.

  3. This excerpt from the original article was quite eye opening:

    “[Dyson] said the system took three years to develop and has since been used in two of its models.

    Samsung’s marketing materials for its new vacuum cleaner specifically highlight the “revolutionary” design of its swivel body machine saying it “makes swift motion for sudden turns much easier”.

    This is not the first time the two firms have clashed in the UK courts.

    In February 2009 a judge ordered Samsung to pay Dyson about £600,000 after it tried to patent the British firm’s existing “triple-cyclone” suction technology.”

    Samsung seems to be a frequent abuser of IP, and in more than one market. This kind of blatant disregard for the innovative work of others is exactly what kills competition. Where are the DOJ’s blood hounds now?

  4. The problem as I see it is, Samsung will probably make a lot of money even if it loses the suit. Jail time in cases like this, and Wall Street, would solve problems with each.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.