patents tft lcd globally made in china

Realize that goal of the invention technical scheme of the present invention is: this production line of the present invention is after glass substrate forming annealing, come out through cutting from annealing furnace, grind, check, packing, to the processing whole process of producing finished product, according to process characteristics and zone, be divided into three work areas according to the operation setting, be followed successively by the annealing furnace end region, the post-treatment district, the test package district, three work areas are connected formation whole piece TFT-LCD glass substrate production line successively, be made as to be interrupted and be connected by manually transporting equipment between annealing furnace end region and the post-treatment district, be made as directly by automatic conveying equipment between post-treatment district and the test package district and be connected; Wherein the annealing furnace end region comprise be disposed with transverse cutting unit, load units, supply unit, weighting unit, rip cutting unit, verification unit, go up the paper unit, packaging unit constitutes, the terminal workspace of annealing furnace constitutes a whole set of sealing working cycle system, each working cell is connected successively, its supply unit connects each working cell thereafter and is loop structure, and each equipment of annealing furnace end region is realized the united and coordinating running by the electrical apparatus control system of supporting setting; The post-treatment district comprises the load units that sets gradually, gets paper unit, supply unit, transposable element, scribing unit, breaks disconnected unit off with the fingers and thumb, grinding unit, cleaning unit constitute, each working cell is connected successively, its supply unit connects each working cell thereafter, and each equipment of post-treatment district is realized the united and coordinating running by the electrical apparatus control system of supporting setting; The test package district comprises that supply unit, temporary storage location, verification unit, the unloading unit that sets gradually, the finished product packing unit of finishing the finished product packing constitute, each working cell is connected successively, its supply unit connects each working cell thereafter, and each equipment of test package district is realized the united and coordinating running by the electrical apparatus control system of supporting setting.

“LCD is one opportunity for Taiwan in a hundred years. It is a sunrise industry, and it’s really important we make the best of it at the end of the day.” as commented Wen-long Shi, the former Chairman of Chi Mei Corporation. He went on to say, “For the 3C industry (computers, communication and consumer electronics), the LCD can be widely used on any electronic product, from refrigerators, air-conditioners, washing machines, to computers, notebooks or mobile phones, and even cars, traffic signs or wrist watches in the future. It’s not difficult to imagine why the industry is so competitive, as LCD is applied so widely.” In this gigantic industrial chain connected by LCD technology, tons of billion dollars change hands from upstream to downstream, and LCD global production value in 2011 alone exceeded one hundred billion dollars. In this completely open market, the frequent patent infringement disputes and licensing problems have become a patent game which every LCD player has to face.

This author has collected and compiled publicly available LCD patent cases published before July 2012, of which the patent infringement cases were from Westlaw database, while licensing information, due to confidentiality reasons, was obtained mainly from news media. LCD patent disputes came into public view in 2000 when the Japanese company Sharp sued Chunghwa Picture Tubes for LCD-related infringement in Taiwan. In 2002 it again sued Chunghwa in Japan for infringing three of its patented techniques in LCD driver programs and LSI setup, for an injunction against latter from importing, and against any sale, offer for sale, display, advertisement or promotion of LCDs using such technologies. Again in 2000, Plasma Physics and Solar Physics, an American NPE (non-practicing entity), sued 9 parties including Sharp and NEC in various courts for patent infringement.

First, there is a criss-cross multilayer game in the production chain. Generally speaking, direct competing relationship exists among business competitors, and players on the same level are more likely to be competitors, among whom patent suits take place. That is not the case in the LCD industry, however, where patent disputes among players on different levels are very constant. The LCD industry can be roughly divided into three levels, namely, the upstream suppliers, including suppliers of equipment, materials, glass strata, driver ICs, optical membranes, and backlight sources, such as Corning and Anvik; the midstream panel manufacturers, representative companies including Samsung, LG, Innolux, AUO and BOE; and the downstream OEM manufacturers, mostly those that mount LCD panels to display equipment, such as Sony, Vizio, as well as Samsung, LG and Sharp. On September 17th 2003, Sharp filed a lawsuit in Californian district court, alleging patent infringement of its LCD technology against BenQ and Viewsonic, which were downstream compani e s t h a t used pane l s from AUO. In 2005, the U.S. glass manufacturer, Guardian, sued AUO, Chi Mei Corporation, Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Dell, Acer and AOC in the U.S., which were all downstream LCD manufacturers. On January 24th 2011, Sharp took simultaneous actions both in the ITC and in federal district court in Delaware against BenQ, Haier, LG, Sanyo, TCL, TTE and Vizio, for using allegedly infringing panels from AUO. On June 6th 2011, a German backlight source manufacturer, OSRAM, filed complaints both at ITC and district court in Delaware against Samsung and LG for infringement of its LED patents. On April 7th 2011, Seiko Epson sued toymakers Leapfrog and Mattel for using LCD modules from Taiwanese Giantplus Technology.

Second, new aspects are added to the game. Generally the patent game can be either patent lawsuits or patent licensing. The LCD industry has fully expounded in these two aspects. In recent years, more is added to the game, including filing patent litigation, responding and counter claiming, as well as a Section 337 investigations and customs recording. For example, during a three-year patent duel, Samsung first requested a Section 337 investigation with ITC against Sharp on December 21st 2007. After a year and a half, Samsung prevailed at ITC which found Sharp infringing two of Samsung’s patents (US6937311 and US6771344). Patent licensing comes in a variety of forms. There are primarily three cooperative modes in the panel industry: 1. Technical licensing, which is the most commonly applied form of technical cooperation. Examples include AUO’s announcement of 170 IBM TFT-LCD licenses in the US on June 30th 2005, and Samsung’s cross-licensing with Sharp after the extended patent war. 2. Joint ventures. Examples are AUO and AOC that entered into a joint venture agreement to establish companies in Poland and Brazil for manufacturing and selling LCD modules; and Samsung and Sony that joint established the panel joint venture S-LCD (however, Sony announced its total withdrawal in December 2001 for the failure of the joint venture). 3. Strategic cooperation. Examples are Hon Hai Precision Industry and Vizio that formed a strategic alliance to jointly enter the TV market in the North America; and Sharp formed a strategic alliance with Hon Hai Corporation by selling to the latter 46.5% of the shares of its Sakai Display Products (SDP).

Third, friends or foes, it depends. In the business world, there are no permanent friends, nor permanent enemies. Participants in the LCD industry may be partners today, but start to sue each other tomorrow. In January 2006, Samsung entered into an extensive cross-licensing agreement with AUO with respects to TFT-LCD and OLED-related patents. But, just before the end of the agreement, it sued AUO, together with AUO’s downstream clients, for patents infringement, at the ITC and district courts in Delaware and North California. Through the actions, as it can be said, Samsung intended to urge AUO to enter into a new crosslicensing as soon as possible. Finally on January 6th 2012, AUO announced its settlement with Samsung, whereby the parties agreed to continue to grant licenses to each other and withdraw their actions against each other, to end their LCD patent controversy.

Settlement is the preferred option. This author notices upon study that there are 300,000 LCD patent applications globally, some of which carry multiple national applications. Any given LCD panel may incorporate up to 1,000 patents, which means no one manufacturer can keep walking within the territory of its own patents, without stepping on the domain of the competitors. The best way for the LCD players to navigate through these patent entanglements as fast as possible, is to get your own patents first, then bargain the litigation through negotiation for a balancing point so as to settle for a solution. From the Samsung and Sharp controversy, to the numerous lawsuits between Sharp and AUO, and to the dispute between Innolux and Sony, statistics show that nearly 55% of such cases were settled either in or out of court, regardless of the duration and the process involved.

Concentration is in U.S. forums. Because the U.S. market is most attractive to manufacturers for its revenue-generating ability on the global scale, its judicial system being well established, and its robust protection of intellectual property, all LCD manufacturers would like to get their cases in US courts. Sharp, LG, 02Micro, Anvik, Semiconductor Energy Lab of Japan and Atomic Energy Lab of France favor filing lawsuits in US district courts, while Samsung, Sharp, Innolux, AUO and BenQ are the mostly sued, 10 times on average, in the country.

NPEs are the more troublesome. The party that raises an action for patent infringement is mostly a midstream panel maker, an upstream supplier, an R&D institution or an NPE. NPEs (or patent trolls) are often deemed as patent licensing companies. They never produce or sell any product, but obtain patents independently or through acquisition. They aim to profit by collecting royalties or compensations from manufacturers, mostly by means of licensing negotiation or patent litigation. They are the most dangerous to manufacturers for two reasons. First, it is generally easy for a company to know the patent portfolio of its competitors, so that it can formulate a strategy to avoid those patents in advance. But, it is almost impossible to know how many cards an NPE has in hand, as it often registers a number of subsidiaries. Second, if sued by a competitor, a company may settle it through cross-licensing. But, an NPE, having no actual products but patents, is not interested in cross-licensing. It goes after monetary damages only.

The recent NPE stories include a few cases of Modis Technology Ltd. from Britain against Innolux in the US from 2007 to 2012, Thomson Licensing in France against Innolux or AUO under Section 337 in 2010, Advanced Display Technologies of Texas in the US against 13 top global manufacturers of panels, computers and mobile phones, including AUO, Sharp, Vizio, Viewsonic, Haier, ASUS and Apple in 2011, where ADT alleged that the 13 manufacturers infringed its display patents; Technology Licensing Corporation in the US vs. ASUS and Westinghouse Electric on account of 3 of its patents being infringed; Yield Boost Tech, a Californian technical consultation and solution provider, vs. Applied Materials, the world’s largest semiconductor equipment supplier, on account of one of its patents being infringed, at the Eastern Californian court.

In 2011, the top five LCD panel makers in the world, according to their market shares, were LG, Samsung, Innolux (the new Chi Mei), AUO and Sharp. As shown, they attack and are attacked the most often with respect to the patent game of the LCD industry. As this patent game cannot be avoided even by the industrial leaders, then how about the situation of enterprises in the Mainland China? It is a surprise to find that among representative Chinese LCD manufacturers, such as BOE, CSOT, Tianma, Panda and IVO, only BOE’s subsidiary in South Korea, BOEHYDIS, was ever sued by the glassmaker Guardian in the U.S. in 2005. No other Chinese enterprises are found in the patent game. Do they own all the intellectual property rights? Is their technical leadership so powerful as to keep themselves out of the patent wrestle? Both answers are absolutely “no.” This author considers a few possible reasons. Some of them purchase whole production lines, new or used, directly from foreign manufacturers, so that they pay the royalty up front. The others reach a technical licensing agreement with foreign manufacturers in private, so that they pay the royalty but do not publish the information due to confidentiality reasons. Moreover, as most Chinese enterprises have limited market shares and their products are at the lower end, they do not create a real threat to foreign competitors in overseas markets.

The market status determines whether a company is worth being sued by other companies for patent infringement. In other words, if a company has never encountered any patent lawsuit, it does not mean it’s litigation proof, but that its status is not high enough. After all, with respect to the 300,000 patent applications globally in the LCD industry every year, no one manufacturer could work within its own sphere of patents without stepping on the area of domain of the other competitors.

With the support in policy and finance from the government, Chinese LCD manufacturers have been growing up. As international panel makers, particularly Samsung and LG, begin to shift their attention to OLED panels, this will very likely leave an opportunity for Chinese enterprises to acquire the global LCD market. For their greater market shares and better profiting situation, Chinese LCD manufacturers will face more criticism in intellectual property from international competitors. They must get themselves ready for coming challenges.

The LCD industry is intensive in both finance and technology and its growth cannot be without government support. When arranging the industry from upstream to downstream or causing the industry to integrate, the government should focus on promoting technical consolidation among enterprises. For technical consolidation, the government should act early to collect relevant information and intelligence with respect to patenting strategies in the LCD area, and study and analyze patent-related litigations. It can be said that a core step of consolidation is to consolidate patent assets. To understand the industrial patent game in an overall way helps enhance Chinese enterprises’ ability to use and protect their patents.

TCL was the first to introduce LCD TVs with a miniLED backlight in 2019. CSoT’s acquisition of LCD patents from Samsung Display signifies a shift of power in the global TV market, putting TCL at the forefront of LCD TV development.

China is home to various TFT LCD panel manufacturers, all offering exceptional services and high-end products. China remains one of the top sources for TFT LCD panel manufacturing, as they have been producing some of the best quality panels available on the market. Many Chinese technology companies specialize in providing these superior TFT LCDs, and several of them have even managed to make it into the top ten list of China"s leading TFT LCD panel producers. These companies are known for their efficient service, impressive product lineup, reliability, innovative approach to design, and customer service excellence. If you are looking for an excellent China-based supplier for TFT LCD panels, it would be wise to consider one of these top 10 China TFT LCD manufacturers.

China is a leading producer of TFT LCD panels, with industry leaders such as BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. (BOE) at the forefront of innovation. Founded in 1993, BOE has developed a comprehensive business structure featuring port products and services for information exchange as well as healthcare solutions like its revolutionary MLED technology. In 2021, BOE boasted an impressive 70,000 independent patent applications, and more than 90% of its new patent applications are for invention patents. Additionally, over 35% of those inventions" patents can be found overseas in the United States, Europe, Japan, South Korea, and other countries. China"s TFT LCD panel manufacturers continue developing their technology by innovating on existing models such as LCD screens and LCD panels to provide better solutions for customers worldwide.

China-based Tianma is a highly reputable TFT LCD panel manufacturer with over 30 years of expertise in the display solutions industry. Since 1983, the company has grown to become a trusted China TFT LCD panel provider, and in 1995, it obtained a public listing on China"s Shenzhen Stock Exchange. With tech and production capabilities at the top of their game, Tianma specializes in SLT-LCD, LTPS TFT-LCD, AMOLED, In-cell/On-cell integrated touch technology, Flexible Displays, Force Touch TED Plus, fingerprint recognition under/on-screen and Mini/Micro LED segments. They have set the benchmark for future innovative developments in terms of LCD panels, LCD screens, and more. Offering unbeatable support services around the globe that are coupled with advanced technology makes Tianma a forerunner for China TFT LCD panel manufacturers.

China"s IVO is one of the top 10 China TFT LCD panel manufacturers and has been making a name for itself since 2005. From its Kunsan Jiangsu base, it now employs more than 3000 staff, including 400 dedicated R&D employees. IVO also boasts a G-5 TFT panel production line, and its products are used in a variety of cutting-edge applications: 60% for notebook displays, 23% for smartphones, and 11% for automotive uses. This makes it an important player in the China TFT LCD market as well as gaining great recognition worldwide in the notebook display industry.

With China being one of the leading suppliers in the global TFT LCD market, 4th in the top 10 manufacturers is TCL CSOT. This China TFT LCD panel manufacturer has been expanding its production capacity with continuous developments in technology and gaining a more solid global presence. According to the latest TV shipment stats, China"s CSOT has ranked 3rd in the world for producing TVs and 1st for supplying domestic 6 major brands since 2014. Furthermore, it holds strong places on the world scale when it comes to 55-inch UD product shipments (1st worldwide) and 32-inch UD product shipments (2nd). G6 LTPS-LCD production line is also amongst its highly lauded products, boasting second place in small and medium sizes with the most accelerated growth rate. Focused on independent innovation-driven development, TCLCSOT reinforces its position as China"s leader in TFT LCD screen technology by accumulating 12185 patent applications since 2019.

China"s TFT LCD panel manufacturer, Truly Semiconductor Co., Ltd., was established in 1991 and dedicated to TN-LCD production and became the first China-based CSTN/LCD line producer in 1995. In 2003 they obtained the OLED patents from Kodak, followed by mass production of TFT-LCD modules in 2012 and breakthrough technology in mobile 3D displays. Their 2013 production launch of naked-eye 3D displays for phones and tablet computers solidified their position as China"s top 10 TFT LCD manufacturers. To expand its portfolio further, it invested in Truly (Huizhou) Smart Display Co., Ltd., which specializes in G4.5 AMOLED and TFT displays. Truly sets an example for China"s other TFT LCD panel manufacturers through its sustained 25 years of research and development, innovation, and brand recognition.

Foxconn Technology Group founded China’s TFT LCD panel manufacturing company, Innolux, in 2003. With its headquarters and factory located in Longhua Foxconn Technology Park in Shenzhen and over 14 production bases situated across China like Nanjing, Ningbo and Foshan, Innolux is known for its comprehensive vertical integration that enables cutting-edge display technology research and development. The high quality and reliability of TFT LCD panels manufactured by Innolux have made them available to be used by some of the major global electronics giants like Apple, Lenovo, Hewlett-Packard Panda, Nokia, and Motorola. Furthermore, its amalgamation with Chi Mei Electronics and Tong Bao Optoelectronics in March 2010 has led to a significant improvement in the level of the world plane display industry.

Founded in 2001, China"s top 3 TFT LCD panel manufacturer HKC has come a long way since its inception. The company designs, manufactures, and markets a full range of TFT LCDs from 1 inch to 60 inches with an annual sales amount reaching up to half a billion USD. As it looks for global expansion opportunities, HKC has established branch companies in Russia and India and formed strategic relationships with customers worldwide. In 2010, the China-based firm moved into a new industrial park and is now capable of producing 1 million displays per month. Thanks to advanced technologies and excellent quality control standards, HKC has been praised by its customers both at home and abroad and continues to prove itself as a reliable China TFT LCD panel manufacturer.

Panda is one of China"s top 10 TFT LCD manufacturers, utilizing cutting-edge technology from China Electronics (CEC) to offer a wide range of products such as crystal resonators, thermal-sensitive crystals, ordinary oscillators, voltage-controlled oscillators, and temperature-compensated oscillators. These are used in various applications of TFT LCD screens that can be found in products like LCD TVs, monitors, and laptops. Panda studies customers" requirements with utmost care and provides reliable services and quality products. With the help of its diverse pricing strategy, it assists its clients in finding value for their money across global markets.

China has a flourishing automotive technology industry, and Eagle Tech is one of China"s top ten TFT LCD panel manufacturers. They understand the special requirements of their use environment, such as moisture-proof, dust-proof, anti-glare, high brightness, sun leakage resistance, and temperature resistance, in order to ensure the optimal performance of their displays. Having years of experience in providing Resistive touch screens, PCAP touch screens, and IPS panels make Eagle Tech the trusted electronic display manufacturer for automotive technologies to meet consumer expectations.

China is the leading source of TFT LCD panel manufacturers, and Eagle Tech has been making a name for itself as one of China"s top 10 TFT LCD manufacturers. Not only do they offer quality automotive TFT LCDs in sizes ranging from 3.5" to 21.5", but their products boast excellent durability as well; if you are looking for a reliable China TFT LCD provider that can deliver quality products for your applications, look no further than Eagle Tech.

TFT LCD manufacturing is an incredibly important part of the technology industry, and Century Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (CTC) is one of China"s top 10 TFT LCD manufacturers. In addition, CTC invests in global optoelectronics industry personnel who specialize in TFT-LCD research and development, as well as manufacturing display panel products such as laptops, PCs, monitors, and LCD TVs. The production line project was installed during the eleventh five-year plan to position CTC at the forefront of TFT-LCD production lines for the Pearl River Delta region. Looking ahead to late 2008, this ambitious project will be put into action – it is sure to leave a lasting impact on the growth of TFT production globally.

China is the world"s largest producer and exporter of TFT LCD panels, making it a great resource for any company looking to purchase them. China is home to some of the world"s most respected TFT LCD manufacturers, with the top 10 China-based TFT LCD panel manufacturers providing displays that consistently exceed industry requirements. All ten have been commended for their amazing product designs, expertise, and quality standards. Collectively, these companies serve customers all over the world by producing panels that are reliable and high-performance – making China an important resource for businesses seeking out cost-effective TFT LCD panels.

China is quickly becoming the leader in TFT LCD technology. The top 10 China TFT LCD manufacturers are a testament to this, as they provide outstanding quality at competitive prices without sacrificing any of the standards that people have grown to expect from China"s expertise and craftsmanship.

It"s clear that China is fast becoming an unstoppable force when it comes to LCD panel production and innovative screen solutions. With its ability to make efficient panels for various applications, China is respected around the world for its skillful production of TFT LCD panels and screens. Additionally, with these reliable manufacturers trying to ensure maximum customer satisfaction with competitive pricing and high-quality products, China has become a trusted source of LCD screens worldwide.

This author has collected and compiled publicly available LCD patent cases published before July 2012, of which the patent infringement cases were from Westlaw database, while licensing information, due to confidentiality reasons, was obtained mainly from news media. LCD patent disputes came into public view in 2000 when the Japanese company Sharp sued Chunghwa Picture Tubes for LCD-related infringement in Taiwan. In 2002 it again sued Chunghwa in Japan for infringing three of its patented techniques in LCD driver programs and LSI setup, for an injunction against latter from importing, and against any sale, offer for sale, display, advertisement or promotion of LCDs using such technologies. Again in 2000, Plasma Physics and Solar Physics, an American NPE (non-practicing entity), sued 9 parties including Sharp and NEC in various courts for patent infringement.

First, there is a criss-cross multilayer game in the production chain. Generally speaking, direct competing relationship exists among business competitors, and players on the same level are more likely to be competitors, among whom patent suits take place. That is not the case in the LCD industry, however, where patent disputes among players on different levels are very constant. The LCD industry can be roughly divided into three levels, namely, the upstream suppliers, including suppliers of equipment, materials, glass strata, driver ICs, optical membranes, and backlight sources, such as Corning and Anvik; the midstream panel manufacturers, representative companies including Samsung, LG, Innolux, AUO and BOE; and the downstream OEM manufacturers, mostly those that mount LCD panels to display equipment, such as Sony, Vizio, as well as Samsung, LG and Sharp. On September 17th 2003, Sharp filed a lawsuit in Californian district court, alleging patent infringement of its LCD technology against BenQ and Viewsonic, which were downstream compani e s t h a t used pane l s from AUO. In 2005, the U.S. glass manufacturer, Guardian, sued AUO, Chi Mei Corporation, Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Dell, Acer and AOC in the U.S., which were all downstream LCD manufacturers. On January 24th 2011, Sharp took simultaneous actions both in the ITC and in federal district court in Delaware against BenQ, Haier, LG, Sanyo, TCL, TTE and Vizio, for using allegedly infringing panels from AUO. On June 6th 2011, a German backlight source manufacturer, OSRAM, filed complaints both at ITC and district court in Delaware against Samsung and LG for infringement of its LED patents. On April 7th 2011, Seiko Epson sued toymakers Leapfrog and Mattel for using LCD modules from Taiwanese Giantplus Technology.

Second, new aspects are added to the game. Generally the patent game can be either patent lawsuits or patent licensing. The LCD industry has fully expounded in these two aspects. In recent years, more is added to the game, including filing patent litigation, responding and counter claiming, as well as a Section 337 investigations and customs recording. For example, during a three-year patent duel, Samsung first requested a Section 337 investigation with ITC against Sharp on December 21st 2007. After a year and a half, Samsung prevailed at ITC which found Sharp infringing two of Samsung’s patents (US6937311 and US6771344). Patent licensing comes in a variety of forms. There are primarily three cooperative modes in the panel industry: 1. Technical licensing, which is the most commonly applied form of technical cooperation. Examples include AUO’s announcement of 170 IBM TFT-LCD licenses in the US on June 30th 2005, and Samsung’s cross-licensing with Sharp after the extended patent war. 2. Joint ventures. Examples are AUO and AOC that entered into a joint venture agreement to establish companies in Poland and Brazil for manufacturing and selling LCD modules; and Samsung and Sony that joint established the panel joint venture S-LCD (however, Sony announced its total withdrawal in December 2001 for the failure of the joint venture). 3. Strategic cooperation. Examples are Hon Hai Precision Industry and Vizio that formed a strategic alliance to jointly enter the TV market in the North America; and Sharp formed a strategic alliance with Hon Hai Corporation by selling to the latter 46.5% of the shares of its Sakai Display Products (SDP).

Third, friends or foes, it depends. In the business world, there are no permanent friends, nor permanent enemies. Participants in the LCD industry may be partners today, but start to sue each other tomorrow. In January 2006, Samsung entered into an extensive cross-licensing agreement with AUO with respects to TFT-LCD and OLED-related patents. But, just before the end of the agreement, it sued AUO, together with AUO’s downstream clients, for patents infringement, at the ITC and district courts in Delaware and North California. Through the actions, as it can be said, Samsung intended to urge AUO to enter into a new crosslicensing as soon as possible. Finally on January 6th 2012, AUO announced its settlement with Samsung, whereby the parties agreed to continue to grant licenses to each other and withdraw their actions against each other, to end their LCD patent controversy.

Settlement is the preferred option. This author notices upon study that there are 300,000 LCD patent applications globally, some of which carry multiple national applications. Any given LCD panel may incorporate up to 1,000 patents, which means no one manufacturer can keep walking within the territory of its own patents, without stepping on the domain of the competitors. The best way for the LCD players to navigate through these patent entanglements as fast as possible, is to get your own patents first, then bargain the litigation through negotiation for a balancing point so as to settle for a solution. From the Samsung and Sharp controversy, to the numerous lawsuits between Sharp and AUO, and to the dispute between Innolux and Sony, statistics show that nearly 55% of such cases were settled either in or out of court, regardless of the duration and the process involved.

Concentration is in U.S. forums. Because the U.S. market is most attractive to manufacturers for its revenue-generating ability on the global scale, its judicial system being well established, and its robust protection of intellectual property, all LCD manufacturers would like to get their cases in US courts. Sharp, LG, 02Micro, Anvik, Semiconductor Energy Lab of Japan and Atomic Energy Lab of France favor filing lawsuits in US district courts, while Samsung, Sharp, Innolux, AUO and BenQ are the mostly sued, 10 times on average, in the country.

NPEs are the more troublesome. The party that raises an action for patent infringement is mostly a midstream panel maker, an upstream supplier, an R&D institution or an NPE. NPEs (or patent trolls) are often deemed as patent licensing companies. They never produce or sell any product, but obtain patents independently or through acquisition. They aim to profit by collecting royalties or compensations from manufacturers, mostly by means of licensing negotiation or patent litigation. They are the most dangerous to manufacturers for two reasons. First, it is generally easy for a company to know the patent portfolio of its competitors, so that it can formulate a strategy to avoid those patents in advance. But, it is almost impossible to know how many cards an NPE has in hand, as it often registers a number of subsidiaries. Second, if sued by a competitor, a company may settle it through cross-licensing. But, an NPE, having no actual products but patents, is not interested in cross-licensing. It goes after monetary damages only.

The recent NPE stories include a few cases of Modis Technology Ltd. from Britain against Innolux in the US from 2007 to 2012, Thomson Licensing in France against Innolux or AUO under Section 337 in 2010, Advanced Display Technologies of Texas in the US against 13 top global manufacturers of panels, computers and mobile phones, including AUO, Sharp, Vizio, Viewsonic, Haier, ASUS and Apple in 2011, where ADT alleged that the 13 manufacturers infringed its display patents; Technology Licensing Corporation in the US vs. ASUS and Westinghouse Electric on account of 3 of its patents being infringed; Yield Boost Tech, a Californian technical consultation and solution provider, vs. Applied Materials, the world’s largest semiconductor equipment supplier, on account of one of its patents being infringed, at the Eastern Californian court.

In 2011, the top five LCD panel makers in the world, according to their market shares, were LG, Samsung, Innolux (the new Chi Mei), AUO and Sharp. As shown, they attack and are attacked the most often with respect to the patent game of the LCD industry. As this patent game cannot be avoided even by the industrial leaders, then how about the situation of enterprises in the Mainland China? It is a surprise to find that among representative Chinese LCD manufacturers, such as BOE, CSOT, Tianma, Panda and IVO, only BOE’s subsidiary in South Korea, BOEHYDIS, was ever sued by the glassmaker Guardian in the U.S. in 2005. No other Chinese enterprises are found in the patent game. Do they own all the intellectual property rights? Is their technical leadership so powerful as to keep themselves out of the patent wrestle? Both answers are absolutely “no.” This author considers a few possible reasons. Some of them purchase whole production lines, new or used, directly from foreign manufacturers, so that they pay the royalty up front. The others reach a technical licensing agreement with foreign manufacturers in private, so that they pay the royalty but do not publish the information due to confidentiality reasons. Moreover, as most Chinese enterprises have limited market shares and their products are at the lower end, they do not create a real threat to foreign competitors in overseas markets.

The market status determines whether a company is worth being sued by other companies for patent infringement. In other words, if a company has never encountered any patent lawsuit, it does not mean it’s litigation proof, but that its status is not high enough. After all, with respect to the 300,000 patent applications globally in the LCD industry every year, no one manufacturer could work within its own sphere of patents without stepping on the area of domain of the other competitors.

With the support in policy and finance from the government, Chinese LCD manufacturers have been growing up. As international panel makers, particularly Samsung and LG, begin to shift their attention to OLED panels, this will very likely leave an opportunity for Chinese enterprises to acquire the global LCD market. For their greater market shares and better profiting situation, Chinese LCD manufacturers will face more criticism in intellectual property from international competitors. They must get themselves ready for coming challenges.

The LCD industry is intensive in both finance and technology and its growth cannot be without government support. When arranging the industry from upstream to downstream or causing the industry to integrate, the government should focus on promoting technical consolidation among enterprises. For technical consolidation, the government should act early to collect relevant information and intelligence with respect to patenting strategies in the LCD area, and study and analyze patent-related litigations. It can be said that a core step of consolidation is to consolidate patent assets. To understand the industrial patent game in an overall way helps enhance Chinese enterprises’ ability to use and protect their patents.

Abstract: The present invention proposes an LCD and a backlight module thereof. A combinational backlight unit is arranged on a lower portion inside a bezel. The combinational backlight unit includes sub-backlight units spliced at intervals. An optical component is arranged on an upper portion inside the bezel and placed on top of the combinational backlight unit at intervals. Dot pattern reflectors are arranged on top of the gap between the adjacent sub-backlight units for reducing reflectivity of light at the gap. The backlight module used in the LCD lessens the difficulty in bending the LGP in the display with a large curve screen, so that a QD tube is suitable for a display with an extremely large size and improving the brightness and contrast of high backlight.

Abstract: A wide viewing film and a TFT-LCD having the same. The wide viewing film includes: a prism layer, and a substrate layer. Wherein, the prism layer is fixed on the substrate layer, and a light emitting surface of the prism layer is contacted with a light incident surface of the substrate layer. Besides, each of the prism layer and the substrate layer is made of a transparent material, multiple quadrangular pyramid-shaped protrusions are disposed separately on the light incident surface of the prism layer, and the light incident surface of the prism layer between adjacent quadrangular pyramid-shaped protrusions is a planar surface. The TFT-LCD includes a first polarizing film, a liquid crystal panel, a color filter, a second polarizing film and a wide viewing film disposed along a light propagation direction. Wherein, the light incident surface of the prism layer faces a light emitting surface of the second polarizing film.

Introduction: Global LCD industry shift and automotive intelligence together to promote the rapid development of China’s LCD panel industry, which will bring a continuous increase in demand for backlight modules, China’s backlight module industry has greater potential for development.

LCD panel backlight module consists of a backlight light source, light guide, optical film, and a plastic frame, which is an important component of LCD display panel. As the backlight module has technology-intensive and labor-intensive attributes, with abundant high-skilled labor advantage China is attracting the global LCD panel industry to the domestic rapid transfer.

From LCD application to the present, the global LCD panel industry capacity transfer has gone through three periods, 2000 Japan dominated the global LCD industry; 2000 – 2010, Japan’s production capacity to South Korea and Taiwan; 2010 to the present, Japanese manufacturers gradually withdraw from the LCD panel industry, production capacity began to transfer to mainland China, so far, mainland China LCD production capacity has occupied the global half of the world.

In recent years, South Korea’s Samsung and LG display will shift their business focus to OLED, and will gradually shut down their LCD production lines and withdraw from the LCD panel industry; at the time of South Korean manufacturers’ withdrawal, domestic enterprises are stepping up new construction to expand LCD production capacity.

BOE, Huaxing photoelectric, Huike, CEC in 2020 – 2021, a total of eight 7 generation LCD production lines completed and put into operation, and domestic panel manufacturers have further expansion plans, the next few years domestic LCD production capacity will continue to increase.

LCD panel manufacturers tend to choose the nearby supporting module suppliers for the safety of the key component supply chain and cost reduction considerations. LCD panel production capacity transfer to China will bring opportunities to domestic backlight module manufacturers and drive the development of the domestic backlight module industry.

According to the terminal application size, backlight module can be divided into large, medium, and small size, of which small size backlight module is mainly used in smartphones, wearable devices, and other terminals, the medium size used in notebook computers, tablet PCs, car screens and other terminals, the large size is mainly used in LCD TV.

From the industry development trend, smartphone display is transitioning to OLED, LCD TV market is gradually saturated, the future of large size and small size backlight module market potential is relatively small; and the future of the car display market potential is huge, by the backlight module manufacturers are unanimously optimistic, are currently accelerating the layout ( see Table 2 ). Focusing on the traditional medium-sized backlight module field, Hanbo Hi-Tech and Weishi Electronics have significant advantages in core technology patents, downstream customer resources, process experience accumulation, production costs, etc., and have more development advantages in the future.

The current global LCD display panel industry is rapidly moving to China, which brings development opportunities to China’s backlight module industry. In addition, automotive intelligence will also bring a continuous increase in demand for medium-sized car displays, the first to enter the field of medium-sized backlight module manufacturers with its customer resources, core technology, scale efficiency, and other advantages will be more beneficial.

Driven by growing demand, TFT-LCD’s manufacturing capacity in China has been experiencing a continued growth rate ranging between 20 to 30% per year. This trend is expected to continue during the coming years as result of coming upgrade cycles in display devices. Beijing Oriental Electronics Technology Group (BOE) and Tianma Microelectronics Co. Ltd rank among the world top TFT-LCD manufacturers.

Air Liquide and BOE recently signed a long-term supply agreement for BOE’s new 4.5-generation TFT-LCD fab in Chengdu high-tech industrial park, in the capital city of Sichuan Province. Under the terms of the agreement, Air Liquide will supply its global offer covering carrier gases (nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen and argon), specialty gases, Total Gas Management and all equipment and installations related to gas supply. The decision made by BOE to choose Air Liquide’s global solution is the result of a long term partnership between both companies.

Tianma Microelectronics awarded Air Liquide the supply of all the carrier gases to its new 4.5-generation TFT-LCD project in Chengdu. This is the first time Air Liquide and Tianma enter into a partnership.

Francisco Martins, Vice-President World Business Line Electronics of the Air Liquide Group, declared: “We are proud to serve the leading players of TFT-LCD in China and therefore reinforcing our position as market leader. This investment will allow our first foothold in Chengdu, one of the most important markets in the South West of China and, at the same time, illustrates Air Liquide’s commitment to contribute to the economic reconstruction of the Sichuan earthquake area. In the current economic context, High Tech and Emerging economies such as China are long-term growth drivers for the Group.”

Established in 1993, has been listed in Shenzhen Stock exchange since 1997. Since then, it has shifted its business from the traditional consumer electronics market to the communications, computer and digital product fields. Currently, BOE is the largest domestic and the world’s No. 9 largest TFT-LCD manufacturer, with a total revenue exceeding 10 billion Yuan in 2007. In 2007, BOE started to build a 4.5-generation TFT-LCD fab in Chengdu with a total investment of 3 billion Yuan.

Founded in 1983 in Shenzhen, Guangdong Province of China, is primarily engaged in the manufacture and sale of liquide crystal displays (LCD) and liquid crystal modules (LCM). The company has established subsidiaries in Shanghai as well as in the United States, South Korea and Europe respectively. In July 2008, Tianma announced its new investment in Chengdu. It’s another 4.5-generation TFT-LCD fab with a total investment of 3 billion Yuan.

Japan Display (JDI) has decided to make Star World Technology Corporation (STC), a Taiwa-based manufacturer of LCD modules (LCMs), into a subsidiary of Taiwan Display (TDI), JDI"s...

Some touchscreen controller and logic IC vendors are expected to step into the LCD driver IC market in 2014 eyeing the growing smartphone market in China, according to industry sou...

As China-based makers will significantly increase production of 42-inch and above TV panels, the global average size for LCD TVs is estimated to rise from 37.9-inch in 2013 to 39.6-inch...

In 2017 China filed more than twice the number of U.S. patent applications globally; more than ten times the number of trademarks; and about 14 times the number of design patents.

China was responsible for 43.5% of all patent applications and about 60% of trademarks filed worldwide. It is responsible for 90% of the growth in trademark filings. It also filed about 70% of the industrial design patents.

IP quantity can only take businesses so far, and there are many weak or questionable patents and trademarks held by Chinese entities, including universities, that never should have been issued. However, it is clear that China no longer wants to be considered a “copycat” nation and is taking what it believes are the right steps to assure that. It means to catch up with global leaders and quickly.

Chinese companies and universities are likely to have at least some quality patents and marks and, unlike Japanese IP holders which were high active U.S. filers starting in the 1980s, are more likely to enforce them.

According to the WIPO report, China recorded the highest application volume for both patents and trademarks inside the country, as well as among other nations, and seeks to protect and promote their work in one of the world’s fastest-growing major economies.

While China claims more patents than any other nation,Bloomberg News says that “most are worthless.” The lapse rate is extremely high, with more than 50% of the five-year old utility patents abandoned and 91% of design patents.

A handful of great patents can be more valuable than thousands of mediocre ones, as the pharmaceutical companies have proven. It takes a lot of work – and some luck – to identify them. China is still learning what IP is and how to use it. Japanese companies patented very aggressively in the U.S. in the 1980s and 1990s when they were being sued by American tech companies, sometimes with the threat of injunction. Many of the patents were said to be of questionable quality but they were able to generate more IP respect for Japanese companies and made them somewhat less vulnerable to U.S. enforcement.

Total patents in force worldwide grew by 5.7% to reach 13.7 million in 2017. Around 2.98 million patents were in force in the U.S., while China (2.09 million) and Japan (2.01 million) each had around 2 million.

Even though the Chinese LED industry took off much later than other regional markets, and local manufacturers still fall behind global players when it comes to technology and patents, Chinese manufactures have advantages in the local supply chain and manufacturing. Strong government support has boosted China’s upstream LED chip industry growth, which has spurred package industry developments. Moreover, emerging markets growing LED lighting markets have also created new business opportunities for Chinese package manufacturers. Additionally, MLS Lighting, Refond Optoeletronics, Jufei Optoelectronics and other Chinese LED package manufacturers have evolved quickly. “Chinese package manufacturers market value was up 15% YoY to US$4.5 billion in 2013,” said Yu.

Corning Incorporated (NYSE: GLW) today hosted an opening ceremony for its Gen 10.5 liquid crystal display (LCD) glass substrate manufacturing facility in the city of Wuhan in the Hubei Province, China. The facility is co-located with a BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. (BOE) plant. With the successful operation of the plant, and the easing of restrictions in the region, Corning is commemorating this important step in building its presence in China and strengthening its relationship with an industry leader.

Corning began shipping production samples from the Wuhan plant in January of 2020 and achieved finishing line mass production by mid-2020, despite pandemic-related challenges. The Wuhan manufacturing facility is Corning’s sixth LCD glass plant on the Chinese mainland and its second Gen 10.5 facility along with the company’s Hefei plant in the Anhui Province, which opened in 2018.

Although the Company believes that these forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions regarding, among other things, current estimates and forecasts, general economic conditions, its knowledge of its business, and key performance indicators that impact the Company, actual results could differ materially.  The Company does not undertake to update forward-looking statements.  Some of the risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: the duration and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its ultimate impact across our businesses on demand, operations and our global supply chains; the effects of acquisitions, dispositions and other similar transactions; global business, financial, economic and political conditions; tariffs and import duties; currency fluctuations between the U.S. dollar and other currencies, primarily the Japanese yen, new Taiwan dollar, euro, Chinese yuan and South Korean won; product demand and industry capacity; competitive products and pricing; availability and costs of critical components and materials; new product development and commercialization; order activity and demand from major customers; the amount and timing of our cash flows and earnings and other conditions, which may affect our ability to pay our quarterly dividend at the planned level or to repurchase shares at planned levels; possible disruption in commercial activities due to terrorist activity, cyber-attack, armed conflict, political or financial instability, natural disasters, or major health concerns; loss of intellectual property due to theft, cyber-attack, or disruption to our information technology infrastructure; unanticipated disruption to equipment, facilities, IT systems or operations; effect of regulatory and legal developments; ability to pace capital spending to anticipated levels of customer demand; rate of technology change; ability to enforce patents and protect intellectual property and trade secrets; adverse litigation; product and components performance issues; retention of key personnel; customer ability, most notably in the Display Technologies segment, to maintain profitable operations and obtain financing to fund ongoing operations and manufacturing expansions and pay receivables when due; loss of significant customers; changes in tax laws and regulations; the impacts of audits by taxing authorities; the potential impact of legislation, government regulations, and other government action and investigations; and other risks detailed in Corning’s SEC filings.