The material in this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete.
As the saying goes, persimmons should be pinched softly, but the US semiconductor industry has shown us the attitude of "bones to pick hard" with practical actions. Previously it was Huawei, and now it's DJI.
As we all know, DJI's competitiveness is exceptionally strong. After being included in the US blacklist, there was news that American technology companies tried to force DJI to reduce the price of its products, but DJI was not afraid of being forced to withdraw from the US market, not only did not reduce prices, but also increased product prices. This is because DJI's share of the US market is quite large, and even under the ban, its market share decline is insignificant, which is enough to show DJI's strong position in this field, and for the United States, DJI is indeed a hard bone.
However, the United States seems reluctant to let DJI go lightly, and recently fined DJI $280 million for patent infringement. There are many rumors in the industry about this matter, some say that DJI refused to pay the fine, and others said that DJI threatened to withdraw from the US market to pressure it. But none of these rumors have been confirmed. Although DJI denied refusing to pay the fine, this does not mean that they will accept the unjustified fine unconditionally. After all, DJI has not infringed any patents, and this kind of unwarranted demand for compensation is not easy for the determined DJI to compromise.
Sure enough, DJI announced that it would appeal and again stressed that they did not infringe the patent. Some outsiders interpret that DJI is only protecting its own rights and interests, because if they accept this fine, it is equivalent to admitting wrongdoing, which will pave the way for future patent trolls. Therefore, the reason why DJI is not compromising is to avoid future troubles.
However, outside media believe that DJI's previous precedent of being blacklisted in the United States may not have much impact on this appeal. This statement is not an exaggeration, because the United States has blacklisted DJI many times, although this has not had much impact on DJI, because they cannot take actual action to sanction DJI, but continue to purchase DJI products to a certain extent. But this also shows that the United States has always been eyeing DJI and is unlikely to be on DJI's side. And those companies that sue DJI for infringement have always emphasized that DJI is related to sensitive markets, which is a matter of great concern to the United States, so it has taken action against DJI on this ground in the past blacklist.
Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that DJI's appeal will fail again due to the other party's insistence on its position. Moreover, at the time of the first fine, the evidence of the other side was not sufficient, and it is clear that the United States tried to involve DJI in this dispute, and in fact could not cause substantial harm to DJI, so they could only save face from such a trifle. In this case, it may not be easy for DJI to overturn the fine.
However, I personally believe that if DJI insists on the appeal and maintains the status quo, they can ask a higher-level review body to intervene. But it is likely that eventually the parties will reach a settlement agreement to settle the current troubles for a lower amount. Overall, DJI may not be able to completely avoid paying a certain amount of fines. However, this can also be seen as a lesson to assert more vigorously its own technology property rights in the international market in order to prevent opportunities for others to exploit loopholes.
In conclusion, do you think DJI's appeal is likely to be successful? Welcome to leave your opinion in the comments, and like and share this article!
However, in the face of this legal battle, we cannot simply see it as a head-to-head confrontation. As a leading global drone manufacturer, DJI has not only made great breakthroughs in technological innovation, but also occupied a pivotal position in market share. Against this backdrop, is DJI's second appeal likely to be successful?
First, we need to consider the impartiality and independence of the U.S. judicial system. Although DJI has been repeatedly questioned and sanctioned by the U.S. government in the past, the U.S. judicial system remains a highly independent and impartial institution. If DJI can provide sufficient evidence that they did not infringe the patent, they can hope to win the case.
Second, DJI's reputation and expertise will play an important role in this dispute. As the world's leading drone manufacturer, DJI has a wealth of technology and expertise that will help them make their position clear in court. In addition, DJI has always emphasized technological innovation and intellectual property protection, which will also help shape their image in legal disputes.
Moreover, solidarity and attention on the international stage will also have an impact on DJI's appeal. Many members of the international community have expressed concern about continued U.S. sanctions against DJI and believe that such actions could undermine the fairness of international cooperation and competition. This international attention may have some impact on the Court's decision, prompting judges to consider all aspects of the case more carefully.
Finally, DJI may seek a settlement with the accusers. While this may require the payment of a certain amount of compensation, it can save DJI from further legal battles while protecting their reputation and market position. In the business world, reconciliation is a common way to resolve disputes, often allowing all parties to accept a certain compromise.
In summary, despite a series of challenges, DJI's appeal again still has a certain possibility of success. This legal battle is not only about DJI's own interests, but also about international law and business ethics. Regardless of the final outcome, this case will attract widespread attention and discussion and set an important precedent for future technological innovation and IP protection. Let's wait and see how the court ultimately decides and what kind of impact this case will have on the tech industry.
The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or allude to any real country, political system, organization, race, individual. The above does not mean that the author of this article endorses the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any problems arising above or related to the above and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability. Due to the rules of the platform, you will only be recognized as a fan if you have more interaction with me. If you like my article, you can click "Follow", and you can receive the article push as soon as you become an iron fan. This article is only published in today's headlines, please do not move.