By Don Southerton, KoreaLegal.org Editor
Seems like Yale University is struggling with the Dongguk lawsuit that stemmed from the Shin Jeong-ah scandal in Korea.
I have long felt that Yale has downplayed the controversy. Perhaps this is in part Yale leadership and lawyers not truly understanding Korean academia and the credibility they place in American universities like Harvard, Princeton and Yale (HPY to Koreans). Hate to be so bold, but I could help here…. Culture matters.
AP Notes… A federal judge in Connecticut has rejected a second bid by Yale University to throw out all the allegations in a lawsuit filed by a South Korean university that claims it lost tens of millions of dollars after Yale damaged its reputation.
Dongguk University claims in the 2008 lawsuit that it hired an art history professor after Yale wrongly confirmed the professor earned a doctorate at the New Haven school. Court papers say the professor, Shin Jeong-ah, later had a scandalous love affair with an aide to South Korea’s president.
Dongguk, a Buddhist-affiliated university in Seoul, is suing Yale for more than $50 million, saying it lost that amount in government grants, alumni donations and costs of building a law school the government later refused to approve because of the scandal.
U.S. District Judge Tucker Melancon on Friday rejected most of Yale’s motion for summary judgment. While the judge granted Yale’s request to dismiss a civil charge of reckless and wanton conduct, he let stand allegations of defamation and negligence.
A trial is set for June. Yale previously lost a bid to get the lawsuit dismissed.
“We were very pleased with the decision,’’ said Robert Weiner, a New York City lawyer for Dongguk. “We believe we have lots of damages we can establish at trial.’’
Weiner said Dongguk is the most prestigious Buddhist university in the world and it suffered a huge blow to its reputation with the Shin scandal.
Lawyers for Yale didn’t return messages Monday. University officials have said the lawsuit is without merit and they would defend against it.
Shin was sentenced to 18 months in a South Korean jail in March 2008 for using fake Yale credentials to get the professor’s job at Dongguk and for embezzling museum funds. Officials said she also faked two degrees from the University of Kansas in getting the job in 2005.
The former presidential aide, Byeon Yang-kyoon, was accused of using his influence to get Shin hired by Dongguk. He was forced to step down as an aide to then-President Roh Moo-hyun because of the scandal.
Byeon was sentenced to a suspended one-year jail term and 160 hours of community service in 2008 for exercising his influence to provide state tax benefits to a Buddhist temple founded by a former Dongguk official who helped hire Shin as a professor, South Korean officials said.
Yale told Dongguk in June 2007 that Shin didn’t receive a doctorate there, saying a letter confirming the degree that Shin presented to Dongguk was bogus and forged. Yale also told Korean media that it never received a registered letter in 2005 from Dongguk asking whether Shin had received a doctorate, even though it did receive the letter, the lawsuit said.
Yale later apologized to Dongguk in late 2007 for what it called an administrative error. But Dongguk officials said by that time the damage to its reputation had been done. South Korean media reported in the summer and fall of 2007 that Shin’s academic degrees were a fraud, that Dongguk failed to verify Shin’s degrees, that Shin had an affair with Byeon and that Byeon had recommended to Dongguk officials that they hire Shin, court records say.
Source: LINK






Samsung Fights Back
Friday, July 1st, 2011By Don Southerton, KoreaLegal.org Editor
In my previous post, I shared how Apple continued to go after Samsung–taking the battle to the courts in Korea. Samsung has countered and file a complaint with the International Trade Commission. My opinion is that much of this is but legal maneuvering designed to position each party best for a settlement. Neither could really expect bans on sale of their rival’s products.
I’d advise Apple’s lawyers to learn more about Samsung and their negotiation style and tactics… Apple leadership would benefit, too. I can help with this.
SEOUL—Samsung Electronics Co.’s countersuits against Apple Inc.’s allegations of product copying have expanded to six countries, the company said Thursday, and now include a complaint with the International Trade Commission seeking to stop the sale of popular Apple products in the U.S.
The suits appear part of a broad strategy by Samsung to fight Apple’s lawsuit over the design of its smartphones and tablet computers with a barrage of litigation around the world.
By doing so, Samsung would build leverage that might force Apple to settle the initial case—which threatens to damage Samsung’s efforts to catch up to Apple in the smartphone and tablet markets, where profit margins are relatively high and market leadership is unsettled.
Samsung declined to answer questions about the strategy. A spokesman said the company doesn’t comment on pending legal matters. Apple declined to comment.
But the scope and ongoing expansion of the countersuits show the importance Samsung, the world’s largest technology manufacturer by revenue, has placed on countering Apple’s accusations that it copied Apple’s designs.
Apple is moving toward seeking a preliminary injunction in the initial case—filed in April in a federal court in San Jose, Calif.—that might limit Samsung’s ability to sell its smartphones and tablet PCs in the U.S., its biggest market.
With the latest filings earlier this week in Delaware and the Washington-based ITC, Samsung now has countersuits pending in California, South Korea, Japan, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom.
“To have lawsuits in many countries at the start, it’s the best way to protect their patents,” Jong Sang-jo, a law professor at Seoul National University, said of Samsung’s tactics.
Apple filed a follow-up suit against Samsung in South Korea last week. It alleged some of the same product-copying violations as in the U.S. case and accused Samsung of violating some of Apple’s technical patents.
The fight is one of many that have been filed over the past year over smartphone and tablet technology. But this one has gained greater attention because Apple and Samsung, while competing in consumer products, have a customer-supplier relationship in which Apple is the biggest buyer of Samsung’s device components, including chips and screens.
That has prompted speculation throughout the electronics industry that Apple might try to end its supplier relationship with Samsung. Such a move would prove costly to Samsung’s chip business, which has yielded the company’s highest profits for the past two years. It would also prove a challenge to Apple to find other suppliers that can provide parts at the volume and price that Samsung can.
Apple executives have said they expect the relationship to continue. A spokesman said Thursday that Samsung said it would fulfill its long-term contracts with Apple, adding: “We view the patent issue as entirely separate from our business relationship with Apple.”
Samsung chairman Lee Kun-hee in late April indirectly criticized Apple’s lawsuit as an attempt to restrain Samsung. “When a nail sticks out, [people] try to pound it down,” Mr. Lee told local reporters at the time.
Since Apple filed the first suit in late April, the legal approaches of the two companies have laid bare their different basic competencies and advantages in the marketplace.
Apple is asserting the primacy of its ability to design distinctive products, a skill that gives it the ability to charge premium prices and reap larger profit margins. By focusing on technology patents rather than design, Samsung is asserting that the development of components, related technologies and manufacturing prowess should be just as, or more, valuable.
In the market, Apple’s strategy has proved more profitable. It has been able to boost both its profit margins and its sales in recent years. Samsung, meanwhile, has had to contend with declining profit margins even as sales rose in its businesses.
For example, Samsung achieved a record profit last year, beating its previous record set in 2004, but it did so with smaller overall margins and a larger base of revenue, approximately twice the sales level it had in 2004.
Source: WSJ
Tags: Apple Korea, Apple Korea iPhone, Apple Samsung Legal issues, Don Southerton, Don Southerton Korea consultant, Korea consultant, Korealegal.org, Lawsuit Samsung Apple, Samsung, Samsung Electronics
Posted in Commentary | No Comments »