In a world increasingly defined by screens—whether in the palm of your hand or across your living room wall—owning the right to display technology is more than business; it’s survival. Over the past decade, the race to dominate the display and touch sensor landscape has led to a wave of intellectual property (IP) disputes. Behind every crisp OLED screen or silky touch interface lies a story of invention, infringement, courtroom battles, and often, quiet settlements. What follows is a journey through the most influential of these IP sagas.
The Icon War: Apple v. Samsung
It began with a swipe and ended with a billion-dollar bruise. Apple’s iPhone took the world by storm in 2007, but by 2011, it found itself locked in a historic legal war with Samsung. Apple accused the Korean giant of mimicking its iconic design—right down to the rounded corners and display grid. Samsung fired back, claiming Apple borrowed from its wireless technologies. Over years of legal ping-pong, juries sided with Apple, awarding up to $1 billion, though that figure was later reduced. Ultimately, in 2018, both parties settled, weary of their decade-long battle. The outcome reinforced the value of design patents and reshaped how competitors approached product aesthetics.
The Feel of Innovation: Immersion v. Apple
While Apple pushed hardware boundaries, haptic feedback pioneer Immersion noticed something familiar in Apple’s Force Touch and 3D Touch. In 2016, Immersion sued Apple for patent infringement. The case pulled Apple into the halls of the U.S. International Trade Commission. Though the details were shrouded in confidentiality, insiders suggest Apple agreed to license Immersion’s patents. Immersion, often overlooked in the tech world, proved it could shake giants—literally and legally.
The Specialist Strikes: Solas OLED v. Samsung Display
In 2021, a lesser-known Irish firm, Solas OLED, stepped onto center stage. Specializing in OLED-related patents, Solas alleged that Samsung's cutting-edge displays used in smartphones had borrowed heavily from their IP. The jury agreed, awarding Solas $62.7 million. But the case didn’t drag on. By 2022, both companies had quietly settled, with industry watchers believing Samsung opted to license the technology. For Solas, it was a masterstroke in the art of patent monetization.
Pixels and Pressure: Samsung Display v. BOE
With BOE's meteoric rise as a Chinese OLED powerhouse, Samsung’s patience wore thin. It accused BOE in 2022—and again in 2025—of copying display designs embedded in devices like the Nubia Z60 Ultra. The legal action wasn’t just about past grievances but future control. Though the U.S. ITC ruled in Samsung’s favor on patent infringement, it declined to ban BOE imports. While the lawsuits continue, most analysts predict this will culminate in a licensing deal or cross-border technology sharing agreement—because neither side can afford to blink in a global market.
Mesh Matchup: 3M v. Elo Touch
In 2017, 3M—known more for Post-it Notes than panels—took Elo Touch Solutions to court over its patented metal mesh touch screen designs. The case flew under most radars, but it signaled a rising trend: material innovation lawsuits. After several months, the dispute ended not in court, but with an agreement. Licensing terms were struck, and both companies walked away with their reputations intact. It showed that not all IP conflicts need to end in public spectacle.
The Long Game: Nartron v. Apple
What happens when a company refuses to license a patent... and then dominates a market that uses it? Nartron, a Michigan firm, had proposed its touch sensor patents to Apple back in 2007. Apple said no. But in 2017, after a decade of touchscreen dominance, Nartron struck back. The lawsuit didn't go the distance—Apple quietly secured a license. It was a reminder that in IP law, time doesn’t always heal; sometimes it recalibrates.
What These Cases Teach Us
From headlines to hushed settlements, these stories show how essential IP protection has become in the display industry. Companies now see patents not just as shields, but as strategic levers. While courtroom victories matter, it's the behind-the-scenes agreements—like Apple’s deal with Immersion or Samsung’s likely resolution with BOE—that shape long-term strategy.
Moreover, the rise of non-practicing entities and cross-border enforcement reflects how complex and globalized display supply chains have become. As display technologies evolve—foldable screens, in-display sensors, haptic feedback—the next chapter of disputes is already writing itself. The battlefield is no longer just the lab—it’s the courtroom, the licensing table, and the global supply chain.