Toss notched the first win in its patent infringement lawsuit over payment devices with Korea Information & Communication (KICC). In one of two petitions Toss filed seeking confirmation of patent invalidation against KICC, the court accepted Toss' argument. As a result, KICC's patent on payment device encryption was invalidated, putting Toss in a favorable position in the main patent infringement suit.
According to ChosunBiz reporting on the 21st, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board accepted Toss' argument on the 19th in the "credit card information encryption patent invalidation trial" filed against KICC. The panel concluded that the patent rights for KICC's existing credit card information encryption technology do not stand.
The legal battle between Toss and KICC began in Oct. when KICC filed for a preliminary injunction with the Seoul Central District Court seeking to "halt the production and sale of Toss' payment devices" over alleged patent infringement. In response, Toss filed for patent invalidation trials targeting KICC's patents on credit card information encryption for payment devices and on an anti-static structure.
KICC argues that Toss embedded two of its patents into Toss' payment devices without paying royalties. Toss counters that KICC's patents do not meet patentability requirements, saying the inventions are either technologies already widely used in the industry or correspond to technical standards disclosed before filing.
The result of the preliminary injunction, a stage before the main suit to determine whether Toss infringed KICC's patents, has not yet been issued. Although the court closed arguments in Jan., Toss asked the court to "wait for the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board's decision, as the validity of the patent right is central to determining infringement," and the court reportedly agreed. Toss submitted supporting materials containing that outcome to the court on the 20th, the day after the board accepted Toss' claims.
An industry official said, "Since Toss won one of the two patent invalidation trials, it should be seen as being in a favorable position in both the injunction and the main lawsuit."